The Kanpur administration has discovered that a Pakistani national sold the Ram Janki temple land located in Doctor Beri Chouraha in Beconganj in Uttar Pradesh’s Kanpur area to a man named Mukhtar Baba in the 1980s, who then demolished the temple and erected a non-veg restaurant named Baba Biryani on the temple site. Action against the illegally constructed restaurant on the temple ground and its owners would now be taken under the Enemy Property Act 1968.
Kanpur’s Ram Jaanki temple converted into Baba Biryani non-veg restaurant by Muslims. Ram Janki Trust property first gifted by a Pakistani Aabid Rehman to one Mukhtar Baba’s mother who by will gave it to her son. Temple and 18 hindu shops disappeared, Biryani restaurant came up. pic.twitter.com/0BfwaPv2gY
— Divya Kumar Soti (@DivyaSoti) May 20, 2022
According to the Hindi daily Jagran, the entire temple was destroyed brick by brick and converted into the ‘Baba Biryani’ restaurant. Only a small piece of the temple is still standing at the site, though in an extremely dilapidated condition. This remaining portion of the temple has been included as part of Mukhtar Baba’s restaurant’s kitchen area. Mukhtar Baba had also forcefully evicted 18 Hindu families from the temple premises, demolished their houses and expanded his restaurant to encompass the entire area.
The revelation was made when the Kanpur administration was searching for ‘enemy properties in the city. The office of the custodian of the enemy property has now initiated the process to enlist the temple property as ‘enemy property’. Based on a report submitted by the SDM office, a notice was issued to the owners of Baba Biryani restaurant warning them that the property would soon be demolished under the Enemy Property Act. Jagran reported how the owner, in turn, tore the notice and threw it away.
“We have given two weeks’ time to these people to respond. We are waiting for them to reply to five specific questions. No response has yet been received,” Col Sanjay Saha, chief supervisor and consultant, office of the custodian of enemy property, said.
According to media reports, in the year 1982, Pakistan national Abid Rehman sold the temple property to one Mukhtar Baba who owned a cycle repair shop in the temple complex in Kanpur. Rehman had migrated to Pakistan in 1962 where his family was already living. He returned briefly to sell the property to Mukhtar Baba. After acquiring the temple land, Mukhtar Baba then evicted 18 Hindu families from the premises and later built a non-vegetarian hotel by demolishing the temple structure.
The matter had come to light after Shatru Sampati Sanrakshan Sangarsh Samiti filed a complaint against Mukhtar Baba last year. The then district magistrate asked the joint magistrate to probe the matter. The report was later sent to the office of the custodian of enemy property. The Kanpur Municipal Corporation records stated that the property is still listed as a temple.
The office of the custodian of enemy property has now begun the process to enlist the temple property as ‘enemy’ property. Notices have been issued to those who bought the temple, dismantled it and converted it into a restaurant.
Mukhtar Babu’s son Mehmood Umar, meanwhile, has claimed that he has all of the relevant documents and would respond to the notice sent to Mukhtar Baba by the department of custodian of enemy property as soon as possible.
The Enemy Property Act
On December 22, 2016, Kiren Rijiju, the then Minister of State for Home Affairs Kiren Rijiju in Modi Government 1.0 introduced the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill Fifth Ordinance and the President of India promulgated it. The act was initially passed following the Indo-Pakistani War of 1965.
“The amendments are aimed at plugging the loopholes in the principal Act to ensure that the enemy properties worth thousands of crores of rupees vested in the Custodian do not revert to the enemy, enemy subject or enemy firm. Thus, in the larger public interest and to safeguard the interest of Central Government, the Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Fifth Ordinance, 2016 (8 of 2016) has been promulgated,” the Ministry of Home Affairs had stated in its statement.
What qualifies as ‘enemy property’?
People migrated from India to Pakistan in the aftermath of the 1965 and 1971 India-Pakistan wars. The Government of India took over the properties and companies of people who adopted Pakistani citizenship under the Defence of India Rules enacted under the Defence of India Act, 1962.
These “enemy properties” were vested by the central government in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India. Property left behind by those who migrated to China following the Sino-Indian war in 1962 was treated the same way.
A section in the Tashkent Declaration of January 10, 1966, stated that India and Pakistan would consider the return of property and assets taken over by either side during the war. The Government of Pakistan, however, disposed of all such properties in their country in the year 1971 itself.
How did the Indian govt deal with ‘enemy property’?
The Enemy Property Act of 1968 mandated that enemy property be continuously vested in the Custodian of Enemy Property for India. The Custodian, on behalf of the central government, has control of enemy properties spread around the country. Some moveable properties are classified as ‘enemy property’ as well.
The Enemy Property (Amendment and Validation) Bill, 2016, was enacted by Parliament in 2017, amending the Enemy Property Act of 1968 and the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants) Act of 1971.
The amended Act expanded the definition of the term “enemy subject”, and “enemy firm” to include the legal heir and successor of an enemy, whether a citizen of India or a citizen of a country which is not an enemy; and the succeeding firm of an enemy firm, irrespective of the nationality of its members or partners.
Even if the enemy or enemy subject or enemy firm ceases to be an enemy due to death, extinction, winding up of business, or change of nationality, or if the legal heir or successor is a citizen of India or a citizen of a country that is not an enemy, the amended law provided that enemy property shall continue to vest in the Custodian.
The Custodian may dispose of enemy properties vested in him in line with the provisions of the Act with the prior approval of the central government, and the government may issue directions to the Custodian for this purpose.
