RIFT OVER CUSTODIANSHIP OF A MOSQUE

Preventing Sectarian Violence

Shahzad Ali was sitting in the office of the Assistant Commissioner (AC) of Model Town sub-
division in Lahore, along with four other magistrates, when suddenly a group of around fifteen
people, dressed in the typical village attire of the province of Punjab, barged into the room. They
were teeming with anger and fury, and were being followed by yelling security guards who were
trying to keep them away from entering the office. “Mr. AC, there is going to be a horrific
bloodshed if you keep on sitting like this in your office and do not attend to our complaint
immediately,” cried an old man who appeared to be in his sixties. “You people are paid from our
tax money and should come out of these air-conditioned offices to see the problems of the
citizens,” remarked a comparatively younger looking man.
The AC, without losing his temper, asked all of them to take a seat and explain the issue at hand.
In the meantime, he ordered his office boy to bring tea for all of them. After settling down, the
complainants introduced themselves as the residents of the town of Kahna, which was located
about 30 kilometers away from the downtown city of Lahore. As this area fell outside the
municipal limits of Lahore, it was administered by a Town Committee which was headed by an
administrator. After the military takeover by General Parvez Musharraf in 1999, all the elected
representatives at the Town Committee level had been replaced by administrators. These
administrators were also the Executive Magistrates for that area. Because Shahzad was serving
as the Executive Magistrate for Kahna in 1999, after the coup he had automatically become the
administrator of the Town Committee of Kahna and this issue concerned him directly.
The Issue: The Custodianship of a mosque
The complainants stated that their problem was with regard to the custodianship of a mosque.
They argued that they were the true custodians of a fifty year old highway mosque, and a person
named Sheik Abdul Sami, had got permission from the local mosque committee to renovate the
dilapidated mosque and was now trying to unilaterally assume administrative control of that
mosque. They also contended that at the time of securing permission for the renovation, Sheik
Abdul Sami had told the mosque committee that he wanted to do this as a service to God and had
no intention of taking over the custodianship of the mosque. He had explained that his mother
had died recently and he wanted to seek blessings from God for his mother by beautifying and
renovating that mosque. Many muslims believe that when they do good deeds in the name of
their deceased loved ones, God showers His blessings on the departed souls. Thus, at that time,
the local mosque committee had given its permission for renovation by Sami.
The majority of the mosques in Pakistan were run by mosque committees, which were selected at
the grass roots level by the people themselves. Sometimes their formal formation was intimated
to the district administration and sometimes they operated informally. In the case of a formal
committee, the district administration was informed and the mosque was then registered in the
name of a sect. In this case, the committee had been informal and the mosque was, therefore, not
registered in any particular sect’s name.

This case has been written by Athar Mansoor, under the guidance of Assistant Professor Ora-Orn Poocharoen and
Rakhi Shankar. The case neither reflects the views of the sponsoring organization nor is it intended to suggest
correct or incorrect handling of the situation depicted and is solely meant as a basis for class discussion. This case
is based largely on actual events but some characters, information and events have been altered for the purposes of
this case study.
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 2 of 15

The precise location of this mosque was outside the village of ‘Kamahan’ on Ferozepur Road
(Exhibit 1). Ferozepur Road was a very busy highway that connected the city of Lahore with
Kasur. Thousands of people travelled daily from Lahore to Kasur and back to earn their
livelihood in the leather tanneries of Kasur. Muslims typically pray five times a day and for men,
it was preferred that they pray at the mosques in a congregation because the reward for group
prayers was believed to be seventy times more than offering it alone at home. Therefore, this
mosque was well frequented by travelers.
The opening ceremony of the renovated mosque was scheduled in a couple of days and Sami had
indicated that he had spent approximately 2.5 million Pakistani Rupees 1 (US $ 59,000) on the
renovation and, therefore, he would now look after this mosque along with those residents of the
village who belonged to his sect, the Ahle-Hadith. Around 60% of the population of Kamahan
was Ahle-Sunnat and 35% was Ahle-Hadith.2 Sami was from Kamahan but after establishing his
business in Lahore, he had shifted to Lahore. He still had many relatives in Kamahan and visited
his ancestral village at least once a week.
Some members of the Ahle-Hadith sect in Kamahan were suspected to been connected with an
active Islamist militant organizations in South Asia. The main founders of this organization had
belonged to the Ahle-Hadith sect and it had a large proportion of Ahle-Hadith muslims as
members. The complainants now feared that Sami, who belonged to this sect, may also be
connected to that militant organization. They expressed concern that Sami might go on to
establish a ‘Madrassah’ (Islamic School) at the mosque and under this guise, he may train
militants for the Islamic organization. The complainants also mentioned that all of them
belonged to the Ahle-Sunnat sect and that they could prove that this mosque had always been
controlled by Ahle-Sunnat.
Background
During the 1990s, Punjab had seen a huge rise in sectarian strife. Hundreds of people had been
killed across the province and one of the main priorities of the government had been to control
the deadly violence. The situation had reached such an alarming point that the Provincial
Government of Punjab had to impose a ban on the use of loudspeakers in the mosques under
Section 16 of the Maintenance of Public Order Act of 1960 (Exhibit 2). Loudspeakers were only
allowed to be used for ‘Azan’ (call for prayers). Complaints regarding the misuse of
loudspeakers had become very common as prayer leaders of different sects made controversial
speeches and discussed sensitive issues pertaining to other sects especially in their religious
sermons before the Friday prayers. The top priority for the district administrative machinery,
headed by the Deputy Commissioners, had been to institute measures to prevent sectarian
violence. In the thirty-two districts across the province of Punjab, the Deputy Commissioners
had constituted District Peace Committees comprised of members from all major sects within the
district. These committees had played an important role in maintaining peace especially during
the holy Islamic months of Muharram and Ramadhan.
The city of Lahore was the capital of Punjab and, in 1998, had a population of around 5.1
million.3 It was also the second largest city in the country and usually the most capable officers
in the government were posted there. The Deputy Commissioners always emphasized the need to
1
In 1999, 1 US Dollar was equivalent to approx. 42.5 Pakistani rupees.
2
Case writer’s estimate.
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 3 of 15

control sectarian violence and made it clear to their teams that no lacuna in this respect would be
tolerated by the Chief Minister of the province. Controlling sectarian disorder had thus become a
very vital issue. After every sectarian incident, a high-powered committee was constituted by the
Chief Minister to probe and fix responsibility for that incident and the officers found guilty of
incompetence were usually suspended. Suspension was usually reflected in the Annual
Confidential Reports of the officers and it badly influenced their growth prospects in the civil
service.
Administration of the Province of Punjab4
The Provincial Government of Punjab governed the province by dividing it into Divisions,
headed by Divisional Commissioners. Each Divisional Commissioner was responsible for the
administration of three to four districts through Deputy Commissioners (DC) or the District
Magistrates. The districts were further divided into sub-divisions or tehsils which were headed
by Assistant Commissioners (AC) or the Sub-Divisional Magistrates. The lowest-ranking officer
for administration was the Extra Assistant Commissioner or the Executive Magistrate who
reported directly to the AC. Executive Magistrates had the largest interface with the citizenry.
Each AC usually divided his sub-division or tehsil into ‘Illaqas’ and put one Executive
Magistrate in-charge of that ‘Illaqa’ (Exhibit 3). All the officers in the district administration
possessed certain judicial powers conferred upon them under different laws such as the Criminal
Procedure Code, the Land Revenue Act and the Civil Procedure Code. The officers presided over
courts to resolve issues pertaining to their respective jurisdictions.
When the military government had taken power in October 1999, the elected representatives at
the local level had also been removed and replaced by the Assistant Commissioners at the
Municipal Committee level and by the Executive Magistrates at the Town Committee level.
Being the Executive Magistrate of the town of Kahna, Shahzad was also the Administrator of the
Town Committee of Kahna. The primary duties of the Executive Magistrates included
maintenance of law and order, management during natural calamities like floods, price checking
of essential commodities, checking of gas stations for possible adulteration of gasoline, checking
eateries for possible violation of health and sanitation laws and removing illegal encroachments
from the roads and streets.
The district police assisted the district administration in the day-to-day operations for matters
within the purview of the police. The district police were headed by a Superintendent of Police
(SP) or Senior Superintendent of Police (SSP) in the case of big cities who divided the districts
into sub-divisions controlled by Deputy Superintendents of Police (DSP) or Assistant
Superintendents of Police (ASP) and the lowest level of police administration was a police
station which was headed by a Station House Officer (SHO). The district police was under the
control of the DC for all issues relating to the maintenance of law and order.
Preventing Bloodshed
The disposition of the complainants suggested that yet another sectarian conflict was in the
offing. Shahzad had been posted as the Executive Magistrate and Administrator for the town of

3
Statistics Division, Government of Pakistan, Population Census Organization, Statistics, Population Size and Growth of Major Cities, accessed
on April 18, 2010, available at http://www.statpak.gov.pk/depts/pco/statistics/pop_major_cities/pop_major_cities.html.
4
This administrative structure was in place before the military government took power in October, 1999.
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 4 of 15

Kahna a few months ago. The AC, realizing the urgency of the situation had directed Shahzad to
immediately go to the disputed location along with the DSP and the SHO of the Kahna Police
Station to ensure that peace and tranquility was maintained. He then had to ascertain the facts
and hand over the mosque to its rightful custodians. The AC further directed him to ask both the
parties to appear in his court with all the evidence in support of their claims.
Without any further delay, Shahzad went straight to his court, and after getting the written
complaint from the people who had approached the AC, he signed the court summons for both
the parties to appear at his court. He also passed a short order announcing that proceedings
would be initiated under Section 145 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The date of the hearing
was fixed for the next morning and he directed his court staff to schedule this case as the first
case the next day. The complainant party was handed the summons in Shahzad’s court to ensure
that none of them missed the hearing. They were also directed not to engage in any dialogue or
conflict with Sami as the matter was now sub judice.5
Immediately after this, Shahzad rushed to the mosque along with the concerned police. The
mosque was being washed and the debris in the surrounding area was being removed with the
help of an excavator. As Shahzad approached the main entrance of the mosque, a middle-aged
man, clad in a white ‘shalwar kameez’ (traditional Pakistani pyjamas and shirt) approached him.
He extended his hand saying “Assalam-o-Alakium sir! Welcome! My name is Abdul Sami and I
am really happy that God has blessed me so much that I was able to beautify this highway
mosque. This mosque is used by the highway travelers extensively. I have also arranged for a full
time ‘Imam’ (prayer leader) and will donate for his salary every month.” He wanted to go on but
Shahzad stopped him by replying, “Waalaikum Salam! I am happy that you have done this but
there is an issue. Some people have lodged a complaint against your intention of forcefully
taking over this mosque from them and converting it into a religious madrassah.”
Sami was utterly surprised over Shahzad’s statement and replied, “But this mosque was not
under the formal control of anyone. There was not even a full time Imam here for the
congregational prayers. You can ask the residents of Kamahan that this mosque was used mostly
by travelers and way farers and many a times, it was these travelers who cleaned this mosque.
There was even no mosque committee to look after the affairs of this mosque. Now when I have
renovated this mosque who are the people claiming to be the controllers of this mosque?” After
Shahzad had explained the details of the complaint against him, he became really aggressive and
enquired about the names of the people who had raised this issue. Realizing the sensitivity of the
matter, Shahzad declined his request. As the adjudicator of a sensitive religious matter, it did not
seem appropriate to divulge the names of the complainants at that time.
Instead, Shahzad asked him not to go ahead with the opening ceremony of the renovated mosque
and to produce evidence to substantiate his claim on the mosque in his court the next morning.
The court summons were served upon him then and there and Shahzad also asked him to bring
along his supporters so that cross examination in the court could help him make a decision.
The next step was to ensure that the night passed peacefully. Shahzad ordered the DSP to depute
a sufficient number of police officials at the mosque to keep troublemakers away from the
mosque. A special police force was called immediately through a wireless message to the office
of the SSP. Shahzad deputed those police officials in his presence and directed the SHO in
5
Under judicial deliberation, before a judge or court of law
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 5 of 15

writing to remain present there till the next morning and to take all the necessary measures to
prevent any untoward incident.
Court Hearing and the Strategic Mistake
The next morning, both the parties appeared in Shahzad’s court along with their respective
lawyers. More than two hundred people from each side waited outside the court room as Shahzad
could allow only a dozen from each side to enter the court. Formal hearing began precisely at
8.15 am.
The lawyer for the complainants started the proceedings by producing affidavits signed by about
twenty people that the mosque, since its inception was always managed by members of the Ahle-
Sunnat sect and at no point in time, had it come under the control of any other sect. He argued
that the land for the mosque had been donated by a Sunni muslim who owned the agricultural
land on the two sides of the mosque. A couple of ‘imams’ (prayer leaders) were also produced in
the court who stated that they had been leading prayers in that mosque on different occasions on
behalf of the Ahle-Sunnat community. A leading entrepreneur of the area, who owned a factory
right across the mosque, also recorded his statement. He was of the view that Sami had shown no
intention of taking over the administration of the mosque earlier and had mentioned that his
largesse in renovating the mosque was solely to seek blessings from God for himself and his
deceased forefathers especially his mother.
Shahzad’s main question to the plaintiffs was why did they allow Sami to renovate the mosque
when they knew that he was from Ahle-Hadith? The reply was simply that he voluntarily came
forward to beautify the mosque and possessed the financial muscle to do so. They did not show
any reservations, because in their opinion, nobody doing good for religious reasons should be
stopped.
The counter arguments posed by the defendant’s lawyer were that Ahle-Sunnat could not prove
that they were the formal custodians of the mosque as it had not been registered in any sect’s or
person’s name. They may have run the mosque informally but that did not give them the right to
claim that they were the custodians of the mosque. The lawyer went further to prove that they
never had even taken proper care of the mosque and the physical condition of the mosque had
deteriorated to such an extent that a person like Sami had to come forward and spend a huge
amount of money on the renovation of the mosque. The lawyer accused the plaintiffs of ill
intentions now that the mosque had become really impressive and worthy of being registered in
their names. He pointed out the fact that though Sami belonged to Ahle-Hadith, he had no
connections with any militant organization and to accuse him of having any links with the
militant outfit was to defame him and to prevent him from establishing an Islamic school for the
poor children of the village of Kamhan.
The hearing continued for about one hour with vigorous cross examinations by both the lawyers.
Shahzad felt that further evidence in the shape of documents and witnesses was needed to go
deeper into the issue and so he adjourned the case for three days, directing both the parties to
gather more evidence in support of their respective claims. The next date of hearing was fixed
and the court adjourned. In his short interim order, Shahzad directed both the parties to exercise
full restraint and not indulge in any activities which could threaten the peace of the area. He also
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 6 of 15

stopped Sami from going ahead with the opening ceremony of the mosque till he had reached a
conclusion about the real custodians of the mosque.
In deciding this case, Shahzad was faced with his own personal dilemma. He belonged to Ahle-
Sunnat sect and his major dilemma was how to overcome his religious leanings in deciding this
case on merits alone.
After passing this short order, he went to his retiring room to call the AC and apprise him of the
latest developments. The AC seemed satisfied with his decision and asked him to report the
matter to the DC as well, as he was ultimately in charge of all the law and order related matters
in the district of Lahore. Shahzad thought it appropriate to go to the office of the DC instead and
meet him personally with the details of this highly sensitive issue. The DC also expressed his
satisfaction with his handling of the issue and talked to the SSP to direct all the concerned police
officials to cooperate with Shahzad on this issue so that the situation remained under control.
Shahzad came out of the office of the DC quite happy as he had taken on board everyone
concerned. Everything seemed to be going smoothly and the situation seemed under control. As
soon as he reached back his office, he sent a message to the SHO of Kahna Police Station
through a priority wireless message, to remove the police from the mosque and to just keep
sending some policemen occasionally over the next three days to ensure peace. He also talked to
the DSP on the phone and told him about the conversation between the DC and the SSP.
Shahzad did not want anything to go wrong. It was the second year of his service. It was also his
first independent handling of a volatile sectarian situation. He was glad that the state machinery
had intervened quite effectively to prevent any conflict. He remembered from his civil service
training, that the ultimate objective of his job was to maintain the writ of the government, and up
till now, he had been successful in achieving this.
The day went by quickly. He was surprised that, although his day in the office had started at 8
am, by the time he had got an opportunity to look at his watch, it was almost 5 pm. Taking a
long, deep breath, he rang the bell to call in his office boy. As he entered his chamber, he asked
him to bring a cup of coffee for him. Sitting back in his chair comfortably, he closed his eyes. It
had been a hectic and tiring day and he thought of leaving for home as soon as he was done with
the wonderful coffee that his office boy was preparing for him. The coffee came and he started
sipping slowly as it was simmering hot. The aroma was relaxing and he started to feel sleepy. It
was time to leave for home. He rang the bell again and asked his office boy to call the driver.
After a few minutes, he was on his way to his house without having the slightest of ideas about a
strategic blunder committed by him.
Miscreants Take Over the Mosque
Fortunately, the commuting time between his office and house was only ten minutes. As the
driver parked the car outside his house, he heard a wireless call for himself from the control
room. He asked the control to carry on with the message. It was a message from the SHO of the
Kahna Police Station. Shahzad was shocked to know that about fifteen armed men had captured
and cordoned off the mosque and threatened to shoot anyone who came near the mosque. The
SHO sought orders from him on how to proceed. How could this have happened? He panicked
for a moment and then regained his composure. He had made a mistake. Why had he given the
miscreants a chance to get hold of the mosque by removing the police. He should have kept the
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 7 of 15

police there till the next date of hearing. He started to curse himself for the blunder and
immediately sent high alert messages to the office of the SSP and the DSP to send special police
reinforcements for the SHO of Kahna. He asked the SHO to remain at his police station till he
reached there.
“Bashir! Move the car. I want to you to reach the police station in twenty minutes. Drive as fast
as possible,” Shahzad shouted to his driver. On his way to Kahna he grabbed the Code of
Criminal Procedure of Pakistan from his brief case and started going through the contents. He
did not want to waste any time in exploring all the options available to him in the wake of this
unwanted development.
The first section of the code which seemed relevant was Section 107 (Exhibit 4). This section
conferred upon him the power to seek bonds, with or without sureties, from both the parties if
there was a chance of breach of peace. He decided that if he was able to get control of the
mosque, he would make use of this section immediately. The other sections which caught his eye
were Sections 145 and 146 (Exhibit 5). He wanted to go over them but had almost reached the
police station. As he entered the police station, he saw the SHO waiting for him outside his
office. The SHO seemed to be quite tense and restless. He approached Shahzad’s car and
opening the door for him said, “Sir! This is unbelievable. How could they do it when they knew
the matter had been taken to the court! I do not even know which party has done this. Let’s go
there and see who the rogue elements are. I do not want any killings there.” Shahzad nodded, and
asked him the status on the special police force being sent by the SSP. “They will reach the
mosque directly in another twenty five minutes to half an hour. I have asked that force to carry
extra tear gas shells as we might need to do a lot of tear gas shelling to disperse the people,” the
SHO replied.

Shahzad went into SHO’s office and started to go over Sections 145 and 146. He knew that he
had started the proceedings of this case under the powers conferred upon him by section 145, but
he wanted to see whether this section also gave him the authority to attach or seal the disputed
property. Sub-Section 4 of Section 145 mentioned the powers to attach the property (to seal it till
the empowered officer was satisfied) if an emergency situation arose. Section 146 seemed
relevant because he could attach the property if there was no clarity about the possession of the
property.

As Shahzad finished reading these sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure, he started to
think over the options available to him. He had not told any of my senior officers about the latest
development. Should he seek guidance from them or should he proceed by himself? He was
afraid that telling them about this new development might undo the good image he had created of
handling the situation effectively thus far. To proceed with sub-section (4) of section 145 along
with section 146 was very difficult as it was almost impossible to seal a mosque in an Islamic
country like Pakistan. Mosques were considered houses of God and many of them remained
open throughout the day to allow worshippers to offer their prayers. There had been very few
instances in the country where the state had to resort to the drastic measure of sealing a mosque.
Should he go for arrests or just use the tear gas to scatter the miscreants and gain control of the
mosque?
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 8 of 15

As he mulled over these questions, the SHO showed him section 151 as well. It read as follows:

Section 151. Arrest to prevent such offences. A police-officer, knowing of a design to commit
any cognizable offence may arrest, without orders from a Magistrate and without a warrant, the
person so designing, if it appears to such officer that the commission of the offence cannot be
otherwise prevented.

On reading this section, he thought of another possibility. Should he send the police under the
SHO to the spot and let him use his powers under section 151, or should he go to the spot
himself and take a decision there after seeing the situation on the ground?
He knew that the situation had become much more sensitive than it had been in the morning and
a decision using the options had to be made fast to prevent the loss of precious lives of the
residents of Kamahan. He felt the weight of his prime responsibility which was to maintain law
and order as his first priority. Cold shivers ran down the length of his spine when he thought for
a split second of a failure to maintain peace and tranquility. He decided to proceed to the site
along with the police.
On the way, the reinforcements from the office of the SSP joined them. They were about 300
meters away from the mosque when they heard some gun shots. Shahzad’s driver halted the car
and told him that the sound seemed to be coming from near the mosque. It seemed dangerous to
go any further and he asked his driver to direct the SHO through the wireless to prepare for tear
gas shelling. The policemen took their positions and started to approach the mosque slowly. As
they were moving, Shahzad kept on giving directions to the police force. As they came closer to
the mosque, he asked the police to start tear gas shelling and refrain from using gun fire as it
could result in human casualties.
Within minutes, the mosque was engulfed by the tear gas and people started to run away. While
the miscreants dispersed, they carried on with aerial firing. The tear gas shelling continued for
around ten minutes as Shahzad saw people running away rubbing their eyes. Within a few
minutes, the police was ready to take control of the mosque. Shahzad asked the police to refrain
from firing any bullets directly towards any person and to round-up as many people as possible.
Most of the people with arms ran away in vehicles parked nearby. The SHO began his police
chase as Shahzad went into the mosque with the ‘danda bardar’ (baton force). There was nobody
inside. The mosque came under the state control. The time had come for Shzhzad to make a
decision and use all the relevant laws to secure the mosque and enforce writ of the government.
The options before him were to:
1. Inform the higher authorities, the AC and the DC about the negative developments and
seek clear orders from them;
2. Ask the SHO to proceed with Section 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and arrest
all the miscreants;
3. Use a combination of Sections 107 and 151 of the Code of Criminal Procedure so that the
miscreants could be prevented from further errant behavior through arrests and bonds and
sureties;
4. Seal the mosque under Section 145 and 146 of the Code and not seek any arrests or
bonds;
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 9 of 15

5. Seal the mosque using Sections 145 and 146 of the Code as well as make arrests and seek
bonds and sureties under Sections 107 and 151 of the Code.
He had to analyze the pros and cons of each of these options before proceeding further. Time
was of the essence as the situation was extremely volatile. A decision had to be made right away.

EXHIBIT 1

LOCATION OF THE MOSQUE

 Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 10 of 15

Mosque Ferozepur Road

To Kamahan
Village

The crop fields and land surrounding the mosque from the South-western side up till the North
were owned by a muslim belonging to the Ahle-Sunnat sect. His deceased father had initially
donated the land for mosque and had also contributed towards its construction

EXHIBIT 2
THE PUNJAB MAINTENANCE OF PUBLIC ORDER, 1960
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 11 of 15

Section 16. Dissemination of rumours, etc.—Whoever--

(a) makes any speech, or
(b) by words whether spoken or written or by signs or by visible or audible
representations or otherwise publishes any statement, rumour or report, shall
be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine,
or with both if such speech, statement, rumour, or report—
(i) causes or is likely to cause fear or alarm to the public or to any section of the
public;
(ii) furthers or is likely to further any activity prejudicial to public safety or the
maintenance of public order.

EXHIBIT 3

ADMINISTRATION OF THE PROVINCE OF PUNJAB

 Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 12 of 15

Government of the Punjab

Divisions headed by Commissioners

Districts headed by Deputy

Commissioners

Sub-Divisions headed by
Assistant Commissioners

Illaqas and Town

Committees headed by
Executive Magistrates

Note: This administration of the province depicts the hierarchy before

the introduction of the devolution of power plan by the military
government of General Parvez Musharraf. After 2001, the Local
Government system abolished the office of Divisional Commissioners. In
the new set-up the districts, sub-divisions EXHIBIT
and union4 councils were
headed by democratically elected ‘Nazims’ (Mayors).

EXHIBIT 4

EXHIBIT 4

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1898

Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 13 of 15

Section 107. Security for keeping the peace in other cases. (1) Whenever (a District
Magistrate or Sub-Divisional Magistrate or an Executive Magistrate [specially empowered in
this behalf by the Provincial Government or the District Magistrate] of the first class is informed
that any person is likely to commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do
any wrongful act that may probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public
tranquility, the Magistrate if in his opinion there is sufficient ground for proceeding may, in
manner hereinafter provided, require such person to show cause why he should not be ordered to
execute a bond with or without sureties, for keeping the peace for such period not exceeding
[three years] as the Magistrate thinks fit to fix.
(2) Proceedings shall not be taken under this section unless either the person informed against or
the place where the breach of the peace or disturbance is apprehended, is within the local limits
of such Magistrate's jurisdiction, and no proceedings shall be taken before any Magistrate other
than a District Magistrate, unless both the persons informed against and the place where the
breach of the peace or disturbance is apprehended, are within the local limits of the Magistrate's
jurisdiction.
(3) Procedure of Magistrate not empowered to act under sub-section (1). When any Magistrate
not empowered to proceed under sub-section (1) has reason to believe that any person is likely to
commit a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility or to do any wrongful act that may
probably occasion a breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility, and that such breach of
the peace or disturbance cannot be prevented otherwise than by detaining such person in custody,
such Magistrate may, after recording his reason, issue a warrant for his arrest (if he is not already
in custody or before the Court), and may send him before a Magistrate empowered to deal with
the case, together with a copy of his reasons.
(4) A Magistrate before whom a person is sent under sub-section (3) may in his discretion detain
such person in custody pending further action by himself under this Chapter.

EXHIBIT 5

THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1898

Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 14 of 15

Section 145. Procedure where dispute concerning land, etc., is likely to cause breach of
peace. (1) Whenever a District Magistrate [or Sub-Divisional Magistrate or an Executive
Magistrate specially empowered by the Provincial Government in this behalf] is satisfied from a
police-report or other information that a dispute likely to cause breach of the peace exists
concerning any land or water or the boundaries thereof, within the local limits of his jurisdiction,
he shall make an order in writing, stating the grounds of being so satisfied, and requiring the
parties concerned in such dispute to attend his Court in person or by pleader, within a time to be
fixed by such Magistrate, and to put in written statement of their respective claims as respects
the fact of actual possession of the subject of dispute.
(2) For the purposes of this section the expression 'land or water' includes buildings markets,
fisheries, crops or other produce of land, and the rents or profits of any such property.
(3) A copy of the order shall be served in manner provided by this Code for the service of a
summons upon such person or persons as the Magistrate may direct, and at least one copy shall
be published by being affixed to some conspicuous place at or near the subject of dispute.
(4) Inquiry as to possession. The Magistrate shall then, without reference to the merits or the
claims of any such parties to a right to possess the subject of dispute, pursue the statements so
put in, hear the parties, receive all such evidence as may be produced by them respectively,
consider the effect of such evidence, take such further evidence (if any) as he thinks necessary,
and, if possible, decide whether any which of the parties was at the date of the order before
mentioned in such possession of the said subject: Provided that, if it appears to the Magistrate
that any party has within two months next before the date of such order been forcibly and
wrongfully dispossessed, he may treat the party so dispossessed as if he had been in possession
at such date: Provided also, that if the Magistrate considers the case one of emergency, he may
at any time attach the subject of dispute, pending his decision under this section.
(5) Nothing in this section shall preclude any party so required to attend, or any other person
interested, from showing that no such dispute as aforesaid exists or has existed; and in such case
the Magistrate shall cancel his said order, and all further proceedings thereon shall be stayed, but,
subject to such cancellation, the order of the Magistrate under sub-section (1) shall be final.
(6) Party in possession to retain possession until legally evicted. If the Magistrate decides that
one of the parties was or should under the first proviso to sub-section (4) be treated as being in
such possession of the said subject, he shall issue an order declaring such party to be entitled to
possession thereof until evicted there from in due course of law, and forbidding all disturbance of
such possession until such eviction and when he proceeds under the first proviso to sub-section
(4), may restore to possession the party forcibly and wrongfully dispossessed.
(7) When any party to any such proceeding dies, the Magistrate may cause the legal
representative of the deceased party to be made a party to the proceeding and shall thereupon
continue the inquiry, and if any question arises as to who the legal representative of a deceased
party for the purpose of such proceeding is, all persons claiming to be representatives of the
deceased party shall be made parties thereto.
(8) If the Magistrate is of opinion that any crop or other produce of the property, the subject of
dispute in a proceeding under this section pending before him is subject to speedy and natural
decay, he may make an order for the proper custody or sale of such property, and, upon the
completion of the inquiry, shall make such order for the disposal of such property, or the sale-
proceeds thereof as he thinks fit.
(9) The Magistrate may, if he thinks fit, at any stage of the proceedings under this section, on the
Rift Over Custodianship of a Mosque Page 15 of 15

application of either party, issue a summons to any witness directing him to attend or to produce
any document or thing.
(10) Nothing in this section shall be deemed to be in derogation of the powers of the Magistrate
to proceed under section 107.

Section 146. Power to attach subject of dispute. (1) If the Magistrate decides that none of the
parties was then in such possession, or is unable to satisfy himself as to which of them was then
in such possession of the subject of dispute, he may attach it until a competent Court has
determined the rights of the parties thereto, or the person entitled to possession thereof. Provided
that the District Magistrate or the Magistrate who has attached the subject of dispute may
withdraw the attachment at any time if he satisfied that there is no longer any likelihood of a
breach of the peace in regard to the subject of dispute.
(2) When the Magistrate attaches the subject of dispute, he may, if he thinks fit and if no receiver
of the property, the subject of dispute, has been appointed by any Civil Court appoint a receiver
thereof, who, subject to the control of the Magistrate, shall have all the powers of a receiver
appointed under the [Code of Civil Procedure, 1908]: Provided that in the event of a receiver of
the property, the subject of dispute, being subsequently appointed by any Civil Court, possession
shall be made over to him by the receiver appointed by the Magistrate, who shall thereupon be
discharged.