A contentious issue has surfaced in Sambhal regarding whether the land of the Jama Masjid was once a Hindu temple. In today’s episode of DNA, Zee News has presented the irrefutable evidence suggesting that the Jama Masjid was constructed over an ancient Hindu temple, as evidenced by the findings from a recent survey.
When Zee News reporters hit the ground to investigate, startling revelations came to light that will force many people, who claim the area to be only a mosque, to rethink their stance.
Threats to Legal Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain
In the ongoing Sambhal case, a troubling development has emerged: threats are being made against Vishnu Shankar Jain, a lawyer representing the Hindu side of the mosque-temple dispute. His role in the case has made him a target, and disturbing messages indicate a serious threat to his life.
This raises questions about the motivations behind such threats. Could they be aimed at derailing the case, or is there a more sinister agenda at play?
Vishnu Shankar Jain: Targeted for Exposing the Truth?
Vishnu Shankar Jain has been at the forefront of legal battles related to Hindu religious sites, including the Ram Mandir-Babri case, Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi case, and others. Recently, in Sambhal, Jain has been accused by certain quarters of inciting violence during the mosque survey, despite evidence to the contrary.
CCTV footage clearly shows the attackers, not Jain, responsible for the violence, yet Jain has been targeted on social media, with claims that he incited the riots.
In an exclusive interview, Jain refuted these accusations and suggested that the threats against him are aimed at silencing the truth and derailing the case. His response raises some critical questions: Is there a truth about the Jama Masjid in Sambhal that some groups want to suppress? Why is Vishnu Shankar Jain being targeted?
The Ground Reality of the Sambhal Riots
The recent riots in Sambhal have seen the active involvement of violent mobs. CCTV footage from November 24 shows masked individuals throwing stones in narrow lanes, an act fueled by a provocative figure who is seen encouraging the crowd.
This individual, dressed in white with a black shawl and cap, repeatedly gestures for the mob to advance and escalate their actions. This footage has led to the identification of key figures responsible for inciting violence.
Following the riots, the police came under scrutiny for their actions, with accusations that they fired indiscriminately on a Muslim crowd. However, further investigation, including more video evidence, suggests that the police were simply maintaining order and did not act as recklessly as some critics have claimed.
New Claims of Ancient Temple Artifacts in Sambhal
In addition to the mosque-temple dispute, new claims have surfaced about ancient Hindu temple artifacts found in Sambhal. Archaeologists claim that remnants of the Hindu temple of Lord Vishnu, including idols and relics from the Gupta period, have been discovered. These claims support the theory that the Jama Masjid in Sambhal was built over an ancient temple.
Atul Mishra, an archaeologist from Sambhal, and his family have collected these artifacts over the years, including a statue of Lord Vishnu and a relic resembling the Vishnu chakra.
Mishra argues that these findings, combined with historical records, suggest that the Jama Masjid site was once home to the Harirh Temple, which was demolished to construct the mosque.
ASI’s Allegations Against Jama Masjid Committee
Another intriguing angle to the dispute involves the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). ASI has filed an affidavit in the Sambhal court accusing the Jama Masjid management of obstructing archaeological inspections.
Despite the Jama Masjid being a protected monument since 1920, ASI officials claim that they have been denied access to carry out necessary preservation work. In recent inspections, ASI found alterations to the mosque structure that they believe were made to hide its original temple-like foundation.
This raises the question: Why is the Jama Masjid committee interfering with ASI’s work? Are they trying to cover up evidence that could reveal the truth about the mosque’s origins?
