India’s highest court, the Supreme Court, has agreed to review a petition challenging a previous ruling that restricted religious observances, specifically the annual Urs, at the revered Hazrat Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus dargah in Gwalior.
This significant development comes after the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) designated the dargah as a protected national monument back in 1962.
The petition seeks to overturn a June decision by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Gwalior. A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and R. Mahadevan has now taken up the case, issuing notices to the central government and other involved parties for their official responses.
In their order dated September 19, the bench directed, "Issue notice to the respondents on the special leave petition as well as on the interim prayer also."
The petitioner’s challenge targets a High Court division bench ruling that upheld a single Judge’s earlier decision.
The initial plea, which sought to compel authorities to permit religious activities such as Urs and Nazam at the site, was rejected by the single Judge.
The High Court’s order acknowledged the petitioner’s claim of being a direct legal heir to Hazrat Sheikh Muhammad Ghaus.
The petitioner highlighted to the High Court that for more than four centuries, numerous religious and cultural ceremonies had been observed at the dargah. However, these activities were either completely banned or significantly restricted after the ASI declared the site a protected monument.
It was further noted by the High Court that in March 2024, the petitioner formally requested the ASI for permission to conduct the Urs at the dargah, but this request was ultimately rejected.
During the High Court proceedings, the Centre’s legal representative asserted that the tomb of Muhammad Ghaus is a centrally protected monument, meticulously preserved and maintained by the ASI.
The High Court reiterated that the tomb of Muhammad Ghaus, located in Gwalior, is unequivocally a centrally protected monument, having been declared a national monument as early as 1962.
Emphasizing its significance, the High Court stated, "In fact it is the duty of the ASI and district administration to protect this monument of national importance with utmost care and strictness so that such ancient monument carrying history and culture into its ambit, be preserved for posterity."
The High Court concluded that the monument warrants supreme protection and vigilance, and therefore, no activities, as requested by the petitioner, could be sanctioned.
In its decision to dismiss the appeal, the High Court also pointed out that the petitioner had not formally contested the ASI’s March 2024 order that denied his initial application.