‘Shrine has stood since Independence’: SC rejects Delhi Waqf board’s claim over gurdwara

The Supreme Court on June 4 dismissed the Delhi Waqf Board’s claim over a gurdwara in the Shahdara area of the national capital, firmly asserting that the Board should have stepped back once it became evident that a Sikh shrine has been functioning there since the Partition era.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and S C Sharma was hearing a 2012 appeal filed by the board against a Delhi High Court order dated September 24, 2010, which had rejected its claim to the disputed site in Oldenpur village.

The Waqf Board had originally filed a suit for possession against Hira Singh, asserting that the property in question was historically a mosque and constituted waqf land. The trial and first appellate courts had ruled in favor of the Board, but the High Court reversed this, stating the Board failed to provide credible evidence to support its claim.

During the Supreme Court hearing, Justice Sharma cut through the ambiguity presented by the Board’s counsel, who referred to the existing structure as “some kind of gurdwara.” The judge responded pointedly, “Not some kind of — a proper functioning gurdwara. Once there is a gurdwara, let it be. A religious structure is already functioning there. You should yourself relinquish that claim, you see.”

The Board’s legal team had argued that the site was used as a mosque “since time immemorial.” However, the Delhi High Court had dismissed this as unsubstantiated. “A mere bald statement in the plaint... was not sufficient to establish this plea,” the HC had said, noting that none of the Board’s witnesses could corroborate the waqf status under oath.

The court also underscored that documentary evidence showed the property was privately owned and sold to Hira Singh by one Mohd Ahsaan in 1953. While Singh could not produce the original title deed, the court noted that this did not bolster the Waqf Board’s case. “The plaintiff has to establish his own claim — not rely on the weakness of the defendant’s title,” the HC had held.

Crucially, the Board’s own witness admitted that a gurdwara had been functioning on the property since 1947 — a detail that ultimately weighed heavily in the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the High Court’s ruling.