By Anwarulhaq Baig
NEW DELHI—While Delhi Development Authority (DDA) demolished the centuries old Akhondji mosque in the jungles of Mehrauli on January 30 on the pretext that it was an encroachment, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) records say that it was a monument.
(The DDA bulldozed the mosque despite the fact that a case about its status is pending for adjudication in the Delhi High Court Court. The next hearing is scheduled on February 22. During the previous hearing soon after the demolition, the high court ordered status quo on the demolished mosque.)
ASI has recorded the mosque in question as a monument in its 1920 list of monuments, that has been documented in a book titled “List of Muhammadan and Hindu Monuments, Volume III (Mahrauli Zail)”.
This four-volume ASI list, commissioned in the British period, recorded thousands of monuments across Delhi.
The then ASI’s Assistant Superintendent Maulvi Zafar Hasan listed the monuments under the supervision of ASI superintendents J.A. Page and J.F. Blackstone. According to this ASI document, the Mosque of Akhondji, located about 100 yards west of the Old Delhi Idgah (monument no. 133), was listed as monument no. 135. Mehrauli, the erstwhile capital during the Delhi Sultanate, was previously known as old Delhi.
The ASI list also mentioned that this adjacent Idgah existed when Timur invaded India in 1398 AD.
The ASI document mentioned that the Mosque of Akhondji was repaired during the last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar’s reign, in 1853-4 AD (1270 AH). It also described a red sandstone slab fixed over the mosque’s central arch, inscribed with two verses in Persian. The translated inscription reads: “O, Zafar! When Akhondji repaired this old mosque and cleared it, he enquired of wisdom the date of repair. It said, ‘Praise be to the good and religious man. The year 1270 (Hijri)”.
Noting the mosque’s design and architecture, the ASI mentioned that it is covered with an arched roof and entered through three arches supported on double pillars of grey local stone. The structure was built on rubble masonry plastered. The floor of the prayer chamber and courtyard are also coated with plaster.
The DDA claims the demolition, based on recommendations by Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor-led religious committee, aimed to remove unauthorized structures in a protected forest area. However, historians, community leaders, and activists, counter that the mosque and graveyard predate the forest designation and were not illegal constructions.
According to experts, religious committee does not have the authority to interfere in any way in case of monuments. Their brief is only with encroachments by constructing religious structures on roadsides or government land. Since the Akhondji mosque is about 800 year old and listed as a monument, it does not come under the purview of the religious committee. Experts say that the religious committee has ignored encroachments on roadsides by building religious structures that are a big source of income for their owners. But the committee has specifically targetted the Muslim religious structures that are entered in records as monuments and are centuries old.
According to Maulana Zakir Hussain, waqf-appointed Imam of the demolished mosque, the mosque was pulled down around 6 am on January 30, 2024. He was told by the policemen that the mosque was on DDA land and hence, DDA wants to remove this to get back its land. They not only demolished the mosque they also removed debris from the spot to show that there was never a mosque here. The DDA, with the help of policemen, illegally bulldozed the mosque despite the fact that a case about the mosque is pending in the Delhi High Court.
Jamaat-e-Islami Hind (JIH) Assistant Secretary Inamurrahman Khan, who visited the Akhondji site and met with mosque management committee officials and lawyers handling the case in the court, calls the action “brutal” and questioned the DDA’s authority, emphasizing the Delhi Wakf Board’s ownership of the site.
According to the DDA, a religious committee of Delhi National Capital Territory (NCT) met on January 4, 2024, to discuss removing illegal structures. Inamurrahman explained that a circular about it came to the mosque management committee through social media, but there were no details on what happened in the meeting or what decision was taken by the religious committee regarding the mosque.
On May 19, 1997, the Delhi High Court issued an order for the demarcation of the boundary and fencing of the mosque in a manner that would not cause harm to the mosque or the graves situated there.
However, the JIH Assistant Secretary stated that despite the High Court order, no demarcation was carried out, and no arrangements were made for its boundary wall or fencing.
He was shocked that despite the mosque and adjoining land being protected property, with the Delhi High Court ordering the DDA not to damage the mosque, buildings or graves during demarcation or fencing, the mosque and graves were brutally destroyed by bulldozers deployed with heavy police forces, and the ruins of the mosque thrown to an unknown location after digging deep into its foundations. The site was cordoned off with no one allowed inside.
Terming the DDA’s actions as extremely inappropriate, unjust and condemnable, the JIH representative said that if the DDA wanted to take legal action, the mosque management committee should have been given proper notice. However, no such notice was provided.
According to Inamurrahman, when he along with a delegation wanted to visit the demolished site that day, the police not only did not allow them inside or to speak to anyone, but also confiscated the camera of one of his team members who tried to take video, deleting the footage. He also said that even one of the advocates fighting the case was not allowed there by police. He demanded the handover of the site to the mosque’s managing committee and the Delhi Wakf Board, along with legal action against officials involved in the demolition.
The JIH functionary said, “This brutal action has been done on the pretext of removing unauthorized structures in Sanjay Van(a new nomenclature given to the forest to change the identity of the area), a reserved forest area. But then this mosque, graveyard and the tomb existed there much before it was declared as a reserved forest. As such, these structures were in no way unauthorized and were not constructed on public land.”
He also called for departmental action and suspension of personnel involved in illegal demolition so to prevent similar incidents in the future.
The JIH official demanded that the premises need to be handed over to the managing committee of the mosque, graveyard and Delhi Wakf Board and facilitate reconstruction of the demolished structures.
“The officers involved in illegal action need to be booked under criminal act for demolishing a monument, and a departmental action be also initiated against them immediately. They need to be suspended to prevent criminal actions in future,” he demanded.
Retired bureaucrat Abdul Hasib Ahmed urged the central government to intervene, highlighting the position of the Delhi Lieutenant Governor, who oversees the DDA and also controls the Home Department.
He stressed the need for immediate demarcation of the land and reconstruction of the demolished structures.
He said, “The contention of the DDA that the demolition was based on the recommendation of the Religious Committee of NCT of Delhi has no meaning as the matter was outside the brief of the committee. Delhi Wakf Board which is now headed by the same person who chairs the Religious Committee is not likely to put an effective defence to protect its properties in such cases.”
Stressing the need for early constitution of Delhi Wakf Board further, Hasib Ahmed further said, “Pending reconstitution of Delhi Waqf Board, its duties could have been assigned to a committee comprising independent persons well-conversant with the matter related to Waqf, instead of one persons administrator that too as an additional responsibility.”
In a series of tweets, historian Rana Safvi provided insights into the rich history of the Akhondji Mosque, sharing images from the now-demolished complex. The mosque was associated with Sheikh Jalaluddin Tabrezi, who played a crucial role in the spread of Sufism. The destruction of such historical sites not only erases tangible heritage but also removes the connections to influential figures who shaped the region’s cultural and spiritual landscape.
Dr. Katherine Schofield, a historian specializing in Mughal India and Hindustani music, raised concerns about the conflicting narratives surrounding the demolition. While the DDA justified its actions by labelling the mosque as an encroachment, historians dispute this claim, emphasizing the need for a thorough and unbiased examination of the situation.
Author and historian William Dalrymple also criticised the DDA for its role in the demolition.
The Indian American Muslim Council (IAMC), an advocacy group, joined the discussion, demanding answers regarding the alleged illegal designation of the Akhondji Mosque. The hashtags #DDA and #Islamophobia started trending as social media users expressed their concerns about the government’s actions, prompting a call for accountability.
Prof VK Tripathi’s revelation of another demolished mosque in Mehrauli, along with a displaced Madarsa, added to the gravity of the situation.
Leading human rights activist Teesta Setalvad highlighted the historical documentation of the Akhondji Mosque dating back to 1922.
Filmmaker Rakesh Sharma pointed fingers at the Modi government’s Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs, led by BJP Minister Hardeep Singh Puri. Sharma questioned whether Puri was aware of and approved the demolitions, emphasizing the need for transparency and accountability within government agencies.
