AIMIM chief and Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi has strongly criticized the demolition drive in Dwarka, Gujarat, alleging it specifically targeted Muslim places of worship and burial grounds.
According to Owaisi, the demolitions violated Supreme Court orders and were carried out without due process.
In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Owaisi condemned the actions, stating, “The demolitions in Dwarka, Gujarat, were aimed at Muslim places of worship and qabrasthans. These were in blatant violation of Supreme Court rulings. The demolished burial grounds and dargah were recognized by the government, and the demolitions happened without challenging their status or following due procedure.
This is completely unacceptable.” He further suggested that this drive was part of a broader agenda to undermine Waqf protections.
The demolition drive took place from January 18 to 25 and involved the removal of what the authorities described as illegal encroachments from several locations in the Devbhoomi Dwarka district. Owaisi’s statements raise concerns about the fairness of the actions, with accusations of religious discrimination.
In contrast, Gujarat’s Home Minister Harsh Sanghavi posted on X, defending the operation. He wrote, “DevBhoomi Dwarka! The 7 islands of Dwarka district are NOW 100% encroachment-free! A total of 36 illegal structures have been successfully removed from the seven islands. I applaud the Administration and team for their hard work in preserving our cultural heritage.”
The structures removed, reportedly built in the last five to ten years, were located on islands requiring special permissions for access. These locations were reportedly home to various encroachments, sparking controversy around the necessity and method of the demolitions.
The Waqf Board of Gujarat has filed a petition in the Gujarat High Court, challenging the demolitions, which they argue targeted properties that had legal recognition. The court will hear the petition on February 4.
Owaisi’s remarks have fueled debates on the government’s actions and intentions, with some alleging that such moves are part of a larger strategy to weaken Waqf property protections. The case has also drawn attention to the proposed amendments to the Waqf Bill, which many believe could erode safeguards for minority religious properties in the future.
Read More: Uniform Civil Code: Registration Necessary For Couples In ‘Live-In’ Relationship From Today
