Indore Bench Of Madhya Pradesh High Court Rejects Muslim Side’s Plea To Cross-Examine ASI Officers

Indore (Madhya Pradesh): Indore bench of Madhya Pradesh High Court on Monday continued hearing in the high-profile Bhojshala dispute, disposing of two interim applications filed by the Muslim side with one requesting cross-examination of ASI officers.

A division bench comprising Justice Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi was hearing a batch of petitions related to the Bhojshala-Kamal Maula complex in Dhar, including petitions filed by Hindu Front for Justice and other parties. Senior advocates Salman Khurshid and AK Chitale, along with ASI and state counsel, appeared during the proceedings.

“One of the applications sought permission to cross-examine officers of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). However, the court noted that the Supreme Court, in its April 1 order and the High Court itself in the April 21 order, had not permitted such a course. The bench therefore, held that no further orders were required and disposed of the application,” said advocate Vinay Joshi, representing Hindu Front for Justice.

The second application raised concerns that respondent No 8 had not received proper access to videography of the Bhojshala site conducted by the ASI despite earlier court directions. The ASI counsel informed the court that the footage had already been uploaded to Google Drive and shared with the concerned parties.

To resolve the dispute, the bench directed the High Court’s IT section to facilitate viewing of the videography and instructed ASI’s assisting counsel to provide additional access to the email ID of senior advocate Salman Khurshid’s team “as early as possible Monday itself.”

The court also permitted the Muslim side to submit written objections to the videography by May 7, specifically identifying the folders and timestamps being challenged. The bench recorded that objections to the ASI report itself had already been submitted and argued earlier.

Senior counsel Sunil Kumar Jain continued arguments on behalf of the ASI during Monday’s hearing. The matter has now been listed for further hearing on May 5. The court said that if ASI concludes its submissions, advocate Dinesh Rajbhar, appearing in another connected petition, will begin arguments thereafter.