The long-standing dispute over the Sanjauli mosque in Himachal Pradesh resurfaced on Friday as Hindu groups continued their hunger strike demanding the demolition of the structure, while the local Muslim community heeded calls for restraint, keeping a low profile during the weekly Jumme ki Namaz. The contested mosque, allegedly constructed without proper authorization, has been at the centre of a protracted legal and administrative battle, and the latest developments illustrate the delicate balance authorities are trying to maintain between law enforcement and communal harmony.

Despite the ongoing tensions, the situation on the ground remained largely peaceful. Very few devotees visited the mosque for congregational prayers, following advice from the cleric of the mosque, who had urged the community to avoid gatherings at the structure until the legal matter is resolved in the Himachal Pradesh High Court. Only a single worshipper, local resident Riyasat Ali, offered prayers at the mosque, highlighting the influence of the cleric’s guidance in preventing potential flare-ups.

Speaking to the media after completing his individual prayers, Ali clarified the position of the Muslim community. “Administration ne kisi ko namaz padhne ke liye mana nahi kiya. Hum iss building ko vaidh nahi maante kyunki matter phir se High Court mein gaya hai. Maulana ne jamaat ke saath namaz se mana kiya hai, lekin koi bhi apni namaz padh kar ja sakta hai. Humein kisi ne roka nahi aur na koi rok sakta hai,” he said. Translated, Ali explained that while the mosque’s legal status is under judicial scrutiny, worshippers are free to pray individually, though congregational prayers have been temporarily discouraged to maintain communal peace. Ali added that the community was awaiting the High Court’s next directions, emphasizing that the court’s decision would guide their future actions.

Meanwhile, Hindu groups, particularly the Devbhoomi Hindu Sangharsh Samiti, have been staging an indefinite chain hunger strike, pressing for immediate enforcement of existing demolition orders issued against the mosque. The organisation contends that parts of the structure were built without the required permissions and has consistently accused local authorities of delaying action. The Samiti’s leader, Vijay Sharma, acknowledged the cooperation of the broader Muslim community but singled out the lone worshipper who attended Friday prayers as attempting to “provoke” tensions. “Main Muslim samuday ka dhanyavaad karta hoon ki unhone sadbhavana banaye rakhi. Sirf ek vyakti aaya, jisne mahaul bigadne ki koshish ki. Aise log ‘jihadi pravritti’ ke hote hain aur hum unki giraftari ki maang karte hain. Court ke aadeshon ka palan ho, masjid ki sabhi manzilein girayi jayen aur bijli-paani kaat diya jaye,” Sharma said, reiterating the Samiti’s demand for the implementation of court orders, including demolition of the mosque floors and disconnection of utilities.

Sharma also pointed out that an eight-member committee, formed by the district administration to examine the mosque’s construction and compliance with legal requirements, had submitted its report. The findings of this committee are expected to play a key role in shaping subsequent administrative decisions. Authorities are likely to brief stakeholders on Saturday, providing further clarity on the next steps regarding the disputed structure.

The Sanjauli mosque has been a point of contention for several years, with authorities and courts previously ruling that certain portions were built without permission. While the Hindu community has consistently demanded immediate demolition, the Muslim community, led by clerics and community representatives, has urged patience and adherence to the judicial process. By discouraging congregational prayers, the cleric has sought to prevent any incidents that could escalate into communal violence, underscoring the priority placed on peace and harmony in the area.

The district administration has maintained heightened vigilance in response to the ongoing protest and potential flashpoints around the mosque. Security personnel are deployed to ensure that tensions do not escalate and that public order is maintained. Officials have repeatedly appealed to both communities to exercise restraint until the High Court delivers its next set of directions. The administration’s approach reflects an effort to balance legal enforcement with the sensitive dynamics of inter-community relations, recognizing that any misstep could have far-reaching consequences in the region.

The legal dispute itself is multi-layered. While portions of the mosque are alleged to have been constructed without formal approval, the Muslim community contends that their religious rights must be respected, even as the matter undergoes judicial scrutiny. The High Court has been reviewing petitions and counter-petitions concerning the legality of the structure, as well as broader questions related to property and administrative compliance. The final judgment will determine whether the demolition orders are enforceable in their entirety or whether certain modifications are warranted, taking into account both legal and social considerations.

The ongoing hunger strike by Hindu organisations has added urgency to the situation. Chain hunger strikes are a form of non-violent protest aimed at drawing public and administrative attention to a specific demand. The Devbhoomi Hindu Sangharsh Samiti has used this method to pressure authorities to expedite the execution of the demolition orders, while also demanding disconnection of water and electricity supply to the mosque and withdrawal of FIRs filed against their volunteers. The strategy seeks to combine legal advocacy with grassroots mobilization, highlighting the political and social dimensions of the dispute.

On the other side, Muslim community leaders have repeatedly emphasized the importance of maintaining peace. By discouraging congregational prayers, they aim to prevent incidents that could exacerbate tensions and derail dialogue or judicial processes. Their measured approach has been acknowledged by Hindu groups, with many leaders publicly noting the cooperative stance of the broader Muslim population, despite the occasional presence of individuals attempting to provoke unrest. This restraint has played a crucial role in keeping the situation calm, allowing authorities and courts the space to manage the dispute through legal channels rather than confrontational means.

Observers note that the Sanjauli mosque row reflects broader challenges faced in urban and semi-urban India, where unauthorized constructions, property disputes, and religious sensitivities often intersect. Resolving such conflicts requires careful coordination between local administrations, law enforcement, and judicial authorities, as well as cooperation from community leaders. The case also illustrates the importance of responsible leadership within religious communities in preventing escalation, especially when legal outcomes are pending.

Looking ahead, the next major development in the dispute is expected on Saturday, when the administration is likely to present stakeholders with findings from the eight-member committee and clarify the next course of action based on the High Court’s guidance. Both Hindu and Muslim representatives have indicated that they will await judicial and administrative directions before taking any further steps, reflecting a commitment to lawful and peaceful resolution.

In conclusion, the Sanjauli mosque dispute remains a sensitive and highly monitored situation, where law, religion, and communal relations intersect. Friday’s developments—characterized by a sparse turnout for Jumme ki Namaz, continued Hindu protests through hunger strikes, and appeals from clerics for restraint—illustrate both the challenges and the efforts to maintain peace. With the High Court expected to provide further guidance shortly, the immediate focus remains on preventing escalation, ensuring public order, and allowing legal processes to resolve the underlying questions regarding the mosque’s construction and legitimacy. Both communities’ cooperation and adherence to peaceful engagement will be critical in navigating the next phase of this longstanding dispute.

---