Of the 20 demolition actions around Muslims establishments recorded in India between June 2024 and February 2026, 11 were triggered by complaints or Public Interest Litigations (PILs) alleging “illegal construction,” according to data reviewed by The Quint.
In 2025 alone, 69 Islamic religious sites were either bulldozed or declared illegal, as per a report by the Association for the Protection of Civil Rights (APCR).
This raises a larger question of whether PILs and legal battles have emerged as a new instrument of the Hindu right-wing politics?
The instances coincide with the amplification of the “land jihad” narrative across media and sections of the political campaigns. In several instances, ‘bulldozer action’ takes place even before a full investigation.
In February 2026, while hearing a petition related to the Faiz-e-Ilahi Mosque, the Delhi High Court observed that “an NGO has been continuously making such complaints regarding religious sites” and warned against encouraging such a trend.
Speaking to Areeb Uddin Ahmed, a lawyer at the Allahabad High Court, he said, "Judicial observations against frivolous PILs serve as a strong deterrent. When courts note a pattern of targeting specific communities, petitioners risk costs or contempt, but genuine PILs remain unaffected. PILs are not meant for settling political scores or targeting religious minorities."
In this report, The Quint breaks down whether these land disputes are administrative in nature, or part of a larger political narrative unfolding through legal intervention and the misuse of judicial tools.
Timeline of Cases: Between 2024 and 2026
The Quint tracked mosque and other Islamic religious site demolition cases in India from June 2024 to February 2026.
We identified 11 instances where individuals and groups filed complaints seeking investigations into mosque structures, alleging they were built illegally.
Additionally, we also found nine other such instances where the action was initiated by different state governments and civic authorities deeming the structure 'illegal,' or razing it for a development project.
In the absence of a comprehensive dataset on mosque demolitions, The Quint analysed news reports and court documents and documented 20 cases of demolitions in and around mosques across the country.
Are these PILs communally motivated?
The rising trend of PILs and complaints challenging the legality of religious sites has drawn attention from courts and activists. Many petitioners claim that certain mosques, dargahs, and shrines are “illegal” or built on encroached land.
Activist Preet Sirohi, founder of the Save India Foundation NGO, has been referenced by the Delhi High Court in this context.
He labelled the Faiz-e-Ilahi Mosque illegal and discussed the associated dargah during a recent news channel debate, alleging that funds meant for Indian mosques are being diverted to Pakistan.
Further, Sirohi claims to have identified over 2,500 mosques and shrines as allegedly illegal. His social media presence frequently focuses on mosques, graveyards, madrasas, and dargahs. Additionally, multiple FIRs have been filed against him in multiple locations for hate speech:
Turkman Gate, Delhi: For inciting communal tension and making inflammatory statements during live social media broadcasts of administrative actions near the Faiz-e-Ilahi Mosque.
Civil Lines, Delhi: For spreading hatred and enmity between communities by misinterpreting Delhi High Court orders (Sections 153A/295A).
Gautam Buddha Nagar, Uttar Pradesh: For allegedly hurting religious sentiments and sharing misleading information online.
Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh: For statements intended to disturb public peace and create fear among residents.
The Quint reviewed Sirohi’s social media pages and found videos in which he claimed that he would take action and investigate the following mosques and mazars in Delhi to determine whether they were constructed illegally. These videos were uploaded in the first thirteen days of February:
1) Shama-E-Masjid in Gopal Vihar: Sirohi claimed that some part of it allegedly belonged to the Delhi Development Authority (DDA).
2) Jama Masjid in Nangloi.
3) A mazar situated around the Azadpur Metro station.
4) Islam Jama Masjid in Raghubir Nagar.
5) Madina Masjid and Kabristan in Jahangirpuri.
6) Nisariya Masjid in Seemapuri.
7) Noori Masjid in Sultanpuri.
- 01/03
Videos by Sirohi display his plans of taking 'action' against illegal mosques and other Islamic structures.
(Source: Facebook/Screenshot)
- 02/03
An appeal, along with a QR code, posted by Sirohi requesting people to support his work.
(Source: Facebook/Screenshot)
- 03/03
Videos by Sirohi display his plans of taking 'action' against illegal mosques and other Islamic structures.
(Source: Facebook/Screenshot)
Speaking to The Quint on the subject, Ahmed said:
“Often, such PILs question the ownership of land where mosques or dargahs are located. Even if petitions are dismissed, legal notices and lengthy hearings create pressure on religious institutions and a sense of insecurity within the community.Areeb Uddin Ahmed, lawyer, Allahabad HC
Similarly, Harishankar Jain, the lawyer representing cases related to the Gyanvapi Mosque and the Sambhal demolitions in Uttar Pradesh, has claimed in a video that Hindus are being forced to migrate from areas with a Muslim majority.
Apart from activists, certain political figures have challenged laws that safeguard religious sites.
Ashwini Upadhyay, Bharatiya Janata Party leader and lawyer, has challenged the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which maintains that the status of a religious place as of 15 August 1947, cannot be changed. He has also questioned the Waqf Act, which allows the Waqf Board to declare properties as Waqf, a decision that is difficult to contest in court.
Ranjana Agnihotri, a lawyer, has challenged the same act in the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque dispute in Mathura, arguing that the Shahi Eidgah Mosque was built on the site of Lord Krishna’s birth during the Mughal period. Her petition has moved from the Mathura court to the High Court. In this regard, a priest-body called the All India Teerth Purohit Mahasabha distanced itself from the matter and noted, “We don’t want what happened in Ayodhya to happen here.”
Mosque Demolition: Action Preceding Thorough Investigations
There have been instances where the administration either neglected to investigate before taking action or took action even after a religious site was deemed legal. Here's a breakdown of some cases:
Uttarkashi Mosque Dispute (2024)
Claim of Illegal Construction: In October 2024, organisations like the Sanyukt Sanatan Dharma Rakshak Sangh (SAN) alleged that the structure was illegally built on government land and questioned the legality of the mosque located on Bhatwadi Road. Later, protests escalated in the area.
Administrative Clarification and Records: After investigating the matter, the District Administration and the Revenue Department clarified that the mosque is 'legal,' according to the documents. The District Magistrate's report stated that the mosque was located on private land purchased in 1969 and has been registered with the Waqf Board since 1987. However, it later changed its stance and deemed the mosque structure as "disputed," reported the Times of India.
The Uttarakhand HC directed the state government and district administration to strengthen the mosque's security and take strict action against those who disrupt communal harmony.
Kushinagar's Madani Mosque 2024: In December 2024, an activist named Rambachan Singh filed a complaint on the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister's portal alleging illegal construction of "Asia's largest mosque" on government land in Hata Nagar, Kushinagar.
Following the complaint, the then Sub-Divisional Magistrate reported that the construction was based on approved maps and private land. However, this officer was later transferred, and the new administration declared it illegal, reported the Indian Express.
On 9 February 2025, as soon as the High Court's stay expired, the administration demolished the front portion of the mosque without giving a 15-day prior notice.
Supreme Court's rebuke: In February 2025, the Supreme Court considered this a violation of its guidelines and "gross contempt." The court issued a notice to the District Magistrate of Kushinagar, seeking an explanation as to why action should not be taken against him.
Akhunji Mosque, Delhi: The Delhi Development Authority (DDA), despite claiming that this historic mosque dates back to the Sultanate period, declared it an "illegal encroachment." It is alleged that it was completely demolished it in the early hours of the morning without any prior notice, reported the Frontline Magazine.
According to the mosque committee, the mosque and the madrasa located there were 700 years old and registered with the Waqf Board. The DDA claimed that it was built on land belonging to the "Sanjay Van" (a reserved forest area).
High Court's rebuke: The Delhi HC expressed displeasure over this action and sharply questioned the DDA as to how such an old structure could be demolished without any clear notice or order. The court ordered a "status quo" in the matter.
Faiz-e-Ilahi Mosque
Following the administration's action, a public interest litigation filed in court presents all the Waqf documents that mention the mosque. The graveyard, which Preet Sirohi's organisation, Save India Foundation, declared illegal, also mentions the graveyard located near the mosque in the 1970 Waqf Gazette.
Seema Sharma and Senior advocate Jatan Singh, lawyers representing the Faiz-e-Ilahi Mosque case, told The Quint, “Preet Sirohi is claiming a community hall within the mosque compound is a wedding hall and is alleging commercial use. Without investigating the allegations, reviewing documents, and issuing notice, the administration proceeded with the bulldozing.”
Speaking on Waqf registered properties, Ahmed explained the legal recourses that can be taken incase of 'bulldozer action.'
If a property is officially registered as Waqf land, the administration cannot bypass the law to carry out demolition.
Ahmed explained that under Section 83 of the Waqf Act, the Waqf Tribunal has exclusive authority to resolve disputes related to Waqf properties. In cases of demolition threats, an application for a temporary injunction can be filed with a civil judge or directly with the Tribunal to immediately halt any bulldozer action.
Ahmed added that legal remedies also include filing a writ petition in the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging administrative action as arbitrary or a violation of fundamental rights. Authorities cannot demolish Waqf properties without following due process, which requires giving notice to the property owner, hearing their arguments, and adhering to the provisions of the Waqf Act.
Why Its Difficult To Prove Every Religious Place 'Legal'
Declaring any religious site illegal or legal in India is not an easy process.
According to a report by the law firm Shanmugam Associates, there are approximately 8.7 lakh Waqf properties in India. These properties span approximately 3.8 million acres and are estimated to be worth approximately ₹1.2 lakh crore.
However, the report states that a large number of these properties lack adequate legal documentation. The legal status of approximately 50 percent of Waqf land is unclear. This is why these lands often face disputes and court cases.
Most ancient religious sites lack a permanent land registry or title deed. They often rely solely on British-era revenue records, such as Jamabandi or Khasra. In cases like Suraj Bhan vs. Financial Commissioner, the courts have clearly stated that these records were created solely for tax collection and cannot be considered concrete proof of ownership.
When a religious institution lacks a registry, it must prove its rights through complex legal provisions like "adverse possession." This makes legal battles in such cases even more complex.
Constitutional expert Faizan Mustafa has repeatedly stated that legal disputes involving religious sites, especially mosques, are not justified in seeking resolution solely through the courts. In a January 2024 article published in Outlook, Mustafa states:
Rather than relying solely on the courts, mutual dialogue and out-of-court settlements between Hindu and Muslim communities may be more effective for achieving lasting peace. When political forces incite religious sentiments, it is difficult to resolve such disputes through legal battles alone.Faizan Mustafa
'Land Jihad:' Integral Part of Politics
Activists who level allegations against mosques, dargahs, and graveyards frequently invoke the term “land jihad,” a phrase that has circulated widely on social media for years. Those who mainstream such narratives are often found using inflammatory or a hate-filled rhetoric.
At the heart of this narrative is the claim that members of a particular religious community construct mosques or dargahs to encroach upon government or temple land. The allegation extends beyond places of worship, suggesting that the growth of Muslim populations itself is part of a broader conspiracy described as “land jihad.”
In our report last year, we documented how campaigns built around claims of “land jihad” and “love jihad” gained traction. In one instance, the spread of rumours led to members of an entire community being forced to leave a town.
Prominent figures in politics and media are now promoting this narrative of land jihad. These individuals include social media influencers, journalists, MLAs, and even Chief Ministers.
Suresh Chavhanke (Sudarshan News): Through his television show, ' 'Bindas Bol,' Chavhanke claimed that the construction of shrines and mosques was a well-planned "land grabbing conspiracy."
Pushkar Singh Dhami (Chief Minister, Uttarakhand): He officially launched a campaign to remove shrines in Uttarakhand and publicly declared that "land jihad" would not be tolerated in the state.
Himanta Biswa Sarma (Chief Minister, Assam): He linked major encroachment removal operations in Assam to cultural protection, calling it a decisive battle against "land jihad."
Vishnu Shankar Jain (Advocate): He represents the petitioners side in several temple-mosque legal disputes and often denounces the Waqf Act as a legal weapon promoting this alleged conspiracy.
Kapil Mishra (BJP leader): He actively campaigned on social media against the shrines built on roads and parks in Delhi, calling them part of "land jihad" and trying to turn the demand for their removal into a mass movement.
Yati Narasimhanand (Mahant, Dasna): He is known for his controversial rhetoric and often describes the purchase of land by non-Hindus in Hindu-populated areas as part of a "land jihad" strategy.
T Raja Singh: Telangana BJP MLA Singh often delivers hate speech at rallies, using terms like "love jihad" and "land jihad."
Kajal Hindustani: In October 2024, Thane police filed an FIR against Hindustani. She had called for an economic boycott of Muslims and made divisive remarks, calling the Waqf Board, a way to promote "land jihad."
Ahmed noted the judiciary's role in curtailing communally motivated petitions and said, "Admitting petitions without scrutiny can encourage copycat filings, but strict judicial review at the admission stage serves as a key safeguard. Courts that dismiss frivolous or communally motivated cases with costs help prevent misuse of the legal process."