Madhya Pradesh High Court Halts Demolition Of Masjid Sadar Anjuman Isla-Ul-Muslimeen

In a significant development in the Indore Nazul land dispute, a Division Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal convened on February 28, 2026, to urgently hear a writ appeal filed by Masjid Sadar Anjuman Isla Ul Muslimeen through its Executive Officer, Sabir Hashmi.

The appeal challenged the order dated February 27, 2026, whereby the Single Judge had dismissed Writ Petition No. 7146 of 2026 with liberty to avail the alternative statutory remedy. The matter was taken up amid allegations that demolition activity had commenced shortly after the writ petition was dismissed.

Senior Advocate Ajay Bagadia, appearing for the appellant along with Advocate Rizwan Khan, submitted that the petitioner was willing to avail the alternate remedy. However, he expressed apprehension that certain observations made by the Writ court on the merits of the case could prejudice the petitioner before the competent authority or forum.

The appellant reiterated that the land in question measures 30,400 sq. ft. forming part of Survey No. 12 and is registered as Waqf property. It was argued that the Tehsildar had exceeded jurisdiction in presuming unauthorized occupation and initiating proceedings based on information allegedly collected from local residents. Counsel maintained that neither the show cause notice nor the Tehsildar’s order recorded a categorical finding that the construction was illegal, particularly the Musafirkhana structure constructed in 2003 pursuant to municipal permission. 

On behalf of the State, Additional Advocate General Rahul Sethi submitted that after dismissal of the writ petition, the respondent authority commenced removal of the alleged illegal construction at 7:30 a.m. and continued till 9:15 a.m. He further stated that, upon an oral request by the appellant, seven days’ time had already been granted to avail the alternative remedy under law.

Taking note of the rival submissions, the Division bench clarified that any observations made by the Writ court on the merits of the case “shall not come in way of the Authority, Forum or Civil Court while deciding the issues between the parties”. The court also made it clear that since no reply had been filed by the State in the writ proceedings, it would be at liberty to oppose the matter on merits before the appropriate forum .

While upholding the Single Judge’s decision insofar as it relegated the appellant to avail the alternative remedy, the bench granted significant interim protection. Considering the upcoming Holi vacation and Eid festival, the court extended the earlier period of one week and granted one month’s time to the appellant to approach the appropriate authority and seek temporary injunction. Till then, the parties were directed to maintain status quo as on the day and time of passing of the order.

With these directions, the writ appeal was disposed of.

In the impugned order dated February 27, 2026, the Single Judge had held that the “core controversy revolves around the title and ownership of the subject property” and that there existed a “profound and irreconcilable dispute regarding the foundational facts”. Observing that a writ court is “not a fact-finding Authority,” the court ruled that adjudication of title and demarcation requires a full-fledged trial with oral and documentary evidence. The writ petition was therefore dismissed, with liberty granted to the petitioner to approach the appropriate statutory appellate forum, civil court, or Waqf Tribunal, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the rival claims.

Case Title: Masjid Sadar Anjuman Isla-Ul-Muslimeen Through its Executive Officer Shri Sabir Hashmi v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others

Bench: Justice Vivek Rusia and Justice Dwarka Dhish Bansal

Date of Order: February 28, 2026