BJP leader and Rajasthan Legislative Assembly Speaker, Vasudev Devnani, urged restraint and discouraged politicizing the ongoing legal dispute over claims of a Shiva temple within the Ajmer Sharif Dargah. Speaking to media on Saturday, Devnani emphasized that the matter is sub judice and decisions should be respected.
“This dispute is still in the court. The court has just issued notices. After that, the court will decide, and whatever it says about the survey, everyone should follow it. I urge everyone not to politicise this matter. Many centres of faith have indeed been tampered with in the last 1100-1200 years. Let the court decide on those centres,” Devnani stated.
The controversy gained attention after a local court in Ajmer issued notices to three parties—the Dargah Committee, the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), and the Ministry of Minority Affairs—in response to a civil suit claiming the presence of a Shiva temple at the site of the Sufi saint Moinuddin Chishti’s dargah.
Advocate Yogesh Siroja, representing the plaintiff, confirmed the court’s actions.
“The concerned parties have been issued notices. I am a descendant of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishty, but I have not been made party to it. We are in touch with our legal team,” he said.
Syed Naseruddin Chishty, Chairman of the All India Sufi Sajjadanashin Council, condemned the trend of staking claims to mosques and dargahs. He criticized the rise of such incidents as divisive and counterproductive to societal harmony.
Adding to the discourse, AIMIM MP Asaduddin Owaisi questioned the adherence to the Places of Worship Act, implying that lower courts were disregarding the legislation.
“The governance of Modi and RSS is weakening the brotherhood and rule of law in the country. They will have to answer for this,” Owaisi stated.
The Ajmer Dargah chief also referred to RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat’s 2022 remark, which cautioned against searching for a shivling in every mosque. Highlighting the human cost of communal disputes, he said:
“The same was done inside Sambhal. The consequences were that five innocent people lost their lives, including two sole breadwinners for their families. How big is this setback to their families? The authorities do not have any remorse for it.”
The civil suit continues to draw attention as stakeholders call for legal, rather than political, resolutions to the contentious issue.