Apex Court Orders CBI Probe Against ASI Into Alleged Alterations Of Historic Gumti Structure In Defence Colony
The Supreme Court has directed the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to conduct a Preliminary Enquiry into the circumstances surrounding the occupation and alleged alterations of a historic Gumti structure in Defence Colony, New Delhi.
The Bench of Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan directed the CBI to file a report on the outcome/progress within two months.
The Petitioner had approached the Court after the Delhi High Court dismissed his plea seeking protection of the Gumti under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
The Petitioner contended that the Gumti, which is believed to be of historical importance, has been compromised due to unauthorized modifications made by the Defence Colony Welfare Association (DCWA). The controversy began in 2004 when the Central Government, through a Gazette Notification, expressed its intention to declare the Gumti a monument of national importance. However, objections were raised by the DCWA, leading to a prolonged period of deliberation within the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
Initially, the ASI had recommended declaring the Gumti as a protected monument. However, in 2008, the Central Government decided that the Gumti could not be declared as a monument of national importance as major additions/alterations had been made by the DCWA, who had been using it as its office leading to the Gumti losing its originality.
Expressing surprise at the turn of events, the Court noted discrepancies in the handling of the proposal to protect the Gumti. "In the year 2004, the competent body to recommend declaration of a structure as a monument of national importance viz. ASI favoured so doing, based on the Superintending Archaeologist’s comments supra, but later the ASI reports that as alterations had been made by the DCWA while occupying the structure, the Gumti had lost its originality. From the note accompanying the letter dated 15.02.2008 addressed to the Superintending Archaeologist by the Director (Monuments), it emerges that the Secretary, Culture had already previously noted “It however not be feasible for the ASI to protect it as a centrally protected monument.” (sic) This creates doubt on the bona fides of the ASI as also the Central Government, insofar as proper processing of the original proposal is concerned," the Court noted in its order dated August 27.
The Court has now directed the CBI to investigate several key issues, including how the DCWA came to occupy the Gumti, the reasons behind the ASI and Central Government's change in position, and the circumstances under which alterations were made to the structure.
The Bench has entrusted CBI to initiate a Preliminary Enquiry on the following aspects:
(i) How and under what circumstances the Gumti came to be occupied by the DCWA, as claimed, from “1963-64”?
(ii) How and under what circumstances, when the Central Government and ASI had initially recommended that the Gumti be declared a protected monument, only on the purported basis of alterations/additions having been made by the DCWA and the sole objection submitted by it, both ASI and the Central Government changed their stands?
(iii) How and under what circumstances and on whose authority were additions/alterations made to the Gumti?
(iv) Why appropriate steps were not taken and by which officer/authority to prevent additions/alterations in the Gumti?
The Bench has also directed the CBI to consider the views of the Petitioner during the enquiry and to submit a report on the progress within two months. Additionally, the Court has ordered that no changes be made to the Gumti by any party until further orders, warning that any deviation from this directive would result in serious consequences.
"The CBI shall also consider the views of the Petitioner in the Preliminary Enquiry. Let the CBI file a report on the outcome/progress of the afore-directed exercise within 2 months from today. Needless to state, if in the interregnum, the official respondents concerned so desire, they will be at liberty to take steps to protect the Gumti, in accordance with law. However, in terms of Order dated 12.03.2024, no change in any manner whatsoever in the Gumti shall be made by any person/body till further orders. Any deviation in this regard shall entail serious consequences," the Court said.
The matter is scheduled to be heard again on November 12, 2024.
Cause Title: Rajeev Suri v. Archeological Survey of India & Ors.
Appearance:-
Petitioner: Senior Advocate Shikhil Shiv Suri, Advocate T.R.B. Sivakumar
Respondent: Amrish Kumar (AoR), Aishwarya Bhati (ASG), Shreekant Neelappa Terdal (AoR), Arvind Gupta (AoR), Shubhranshu Padh (AoR), Advocates Rakesh Sinha, Ghulam Akbar, Jeemon Raju K., Shruti Shashi, Sushant Shekhar, D. Girish Kumar, Jay Nirupam, Pranav Giri, Ekansh Sisodia, A.M. Harsavardhini
Click here to read/download the Order
