Delhi HC calls Idgah committee’s plea against Jhansi Rani’s statue divisive and scandalous

Amid broad deliberations on the Waqf Bill, which proposes granting the government more power to manage Waqf properties, including deciding their ownership, the Delhi Shahi Idgah Managing Committee’s plea seeking to restrain the installation of the Maharani Lakshmi Bai statue at Shahi Idgah Park in Sadar Bazar—claimed to be a Waqf property—has been called 'scandalous pleadings' and accused of communal politics by the Delhi High Court.

The bench, comprising Chief Justice Designate Manmohan and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, expressed disapproval of the committee’s attempts to introduce religious and communal undertones into what the court deemed a historical and national issue.

Maharani Lakshmi Bai celebrated for her leadership and valour during the Indian Rebellion of 1857, is regarded as a "national hero" whose legacy transcends religious boundaries. The court emphasized that dividing history through communal lenses was both inappropriate and divisive.

The controversy began when the Shahi Idgah Managing Committee filed an appeal challenging a single judge's order that had permitted the installation of the statue within the park. The committee sought to restrain the installation, arguing that the Shahi Idgah Park, an area of historical significance, should not be used for purposes other than religious activities.

The appeal was reportedly grounded in concerns over the park’s use and ownership, with the committee citing a 1970 gazette notification that described the park as a waqf property historically used for offering prayers.

The Delhi High Court’s division bench took exception to the committee’s legal submissions, describing them as "divisive" and asserting that the plea lacked legitimate cause. The court's discontent was particularly evident in its critique of the language used in the appeal, which it described as "scandalous" and indicative of attempts to drag the judiciary into communal politics. The bench stressed that the court should not be a forum for such issues, urging the committee to address the matter outside judicial proceedings.

"The intent, it seems, is to do communal politics through court. Rani Lakshmi Bai has nothing to do with religion. In case the land belonged to you, you should have volunteered yourself," the bench stated. This condemnation was accompanied by an order for the committee to withdraw the offending pleadings and issue a written apology.

The committee’s counsel offered an apology, asserting that the plea was not intended to be politically motivated. The counsel clarified that the managing committee did not claim ownership of the land and was primarily concerned with the historical and religious significance of the Shahi Idgah. However, the bench remained firm in its stance, directing the counsel to delete the objectionable paragraphs and file an application to that effect by Thursday.

The court also observed a broader trend of harsh and politically charged statements being made in legal pleadings, reflecting a disturbing tendency to address judicial bodies with political agendas rather than legal arguments. This observation was echoed by Delhi government standing counsel Santosh Kumar Tripathi, who criticized the practice of making inflammatory statements in legal documents.

The background of the dispute involves a single judge’s earlier order which had rejected the committee’s plea to prevent the installation of Maharani Lakshmi Bai’s statue. The judge had found that the committee had no fundamental right to oppose the maintenance and use of the park by the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), which oversees the area. The court had previously ruled that the park and surrounding open ground were DDA properties and should be maintained for public use, including recreational purposes.

The single judge’s decision was supported by a coordinate bench ruling which confirmed that the DDA was responsible for managing the land and determining its usage. This included the installation of the statue, which was endorsed by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD). The judge’s ruling also noted that the Delhi Waqf Board did not authorise the use of the park for non-religious purposes, but acknowledged the DDA’s role in allocating portions of the land for public activities.

As the matter continues to unfold, the Delhi High Court has scheduled further hearings for September 27 to review the committee’s compliance with the court’s directives and to ensure that the communal undertones are removed from the legal proceedings.