Rahul, Pujara fail as India totter at 88 for 4 at lunch
New Delhi (PTI): KL Rahul's bad patch continued while Cheteshwar Pujara had a forgettable first innings outing in his 100th Test as premier Australian spinner Nathan Lyon reduced India to 88 for four at lunch on day two of the second Test here on Saturday.
Only skipper Rohit Sharma (32) looked in good touch as a vintage Lyon (11-1-25-4) was in his element, troubling the top-order repeatedly.
The Kotla track had a bit more pace off the track compared to Jamtha and hence Lyon's deliveries at times hurried the batters. Also giving a bit more air created doubts in the minds of the batters.
Rahul (17), who survived two DRS appeals by Australia, was trapped leg-before as Lyon tossed one from round the wicket and got it to deviate enough and find his pads.
Rahul's saga of failures continued and now a question would be asked whether the Indian team management is being unfair by forcing Shubman Gill to cool his heels in the dugout.
Rohit seemed to carry from where he had left in the first Test and was also playing the sweep shot to good effect. However he played across the line to a straighter one from Lyon and was castled in the process.
Rarely has Pujara walked into bat amid such fanfare and 20,000 plus Kotla crowd chanting his name but his milestone match turned out to be some sort of an anti-climax as he failed to bother the scorers.
In case of Pujara, it was another flighted one and it turned back enough with the orthodox Rajkot man trying to play a half forward defensive stroke. The turn was enough for the umpire to raise his dreaded finger.
Coming back from injury, Shreyas Iyer (4) looked confident in his brief stay at the crease but a stroke of bad luck brought about his downfall.
He played one of his legs towards the leg-side and Peter Handscomb latched on to a reflex catch which wouldn't get stuck nine out of 10 times. Handscomb actually fumbled but the ball simply stuck between his legs to see Iyer's back.
At the break, Ravindra Jadeja (14 batting), one of India's best Test batters in recent years, was at the crease along with Virat Kohli (15 batting).
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Bhojshala complex registered as 'mosque' in old revenue records: Muslim side to MP HC
Indore (PTI): The disputed Bhojshala Temple-Kamal Maula Mosque complex has historically been registered as a 'mosque' in revenue records and available sources don't clearly mention any Saraswati temple established by then-king Raja Bhoj, the Muslim side has told the Madhya Pradesh High Court.
The Hindu community considers Bhojshala a temple dedicated to Goddess Saraswati, while the Muslim side calls the 11th-century monument Kamal Maula Mosque. The disputed complex located in Dhar district is protected by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
During the hearing before the HC's Indore bench of Justices Vijay Kumar Shukla and Justice Alok Awasthi on Wednesday, Qazi Moinuddin questioned two PILs filed as intervenors in the Bhojshala case by an organisation named Hindu Front for Justice, one Kuldeep Tiwari and another individual.
Moinuddin claims to be a descendant of Sufi saint Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti and the 'Sajjadanashin' (spiritual head, guru, or successor of a Sufi shrine, khanqah, or religious site).
The PILs state that Bhojshala is actually a Saraswati temple and only Hindus should be granted the right to worship at the disputed complex.
Moinuddin's lawyer, Noor Ahmed Sheikh, claimed in the court that his client's ancestors, who are descendants of Maulana Kamaluddin Chishti, have historically held titles to the complex, and the site was also recorded as a "mosque" in government revenue records.
He contended that those associated with the management of the Kamal Maula Mosque, located within the complex, have been in "continuous and peaceful occupation" of the site for a long time.
Citing Muslim law, Sheikh argued that in the case of religious property, particularly a mosque or its related properties, officials such as the Sajjadanashin and Mutawalli (person entrusted with management, maintenance, and administration of a Waqf), and their descendants, not only have the right to intervene, but also have the right to manage and use such a structure.
Citing provisions of the Ancient Monuments Preservation Act 1904, the Muslim side's lawyer said the term "in-charge of the property" is used in this law, which makes it clear that the person or party who has been in charge of a property for a long time has rights over it.
During the hearing, Touseef Warsi, the lawyer representing the Maulana Kamaluddin Welfare Society of Dhar, claimed that Hindu parties in both PILs had made "misleading representations" regarding historical facts before the high court.
He further claimed that available historical sources do not clearly mention the existence of a Saraswati temple established by Raja Bhoj, the legendary king of the Parmar dynasty who ruled Dhar from 1010 to 1055.
The ASI, a central government agency, has adopted three different positions in the lawsuits filed regarding the Bhojshala dispute, changing its answers from time to time, and this situation raises serious questions about judicial scrutiny of the complex, Warsi submitted.
He raised objections regarding the ASI's process of scientific survey of the Bhojshala complex, carried out on the HC order in 2024, and the method of videography and requested the court to examine these objections.
The hearing in the Bhojshala case will continue on Thursday.
The HC has been regularly hearing four petitions and one writ appeal since April 6, contesting the religious nature of the monument.
