'Why not Taj Mahal too?' Apex court scraps Mughal emperor's descendant Sultan Begum's plea seeking Red Fort ownership
Red Fort during Independence Day celebrations | PTI
The Supreme Court on Monday quashed a petition seeking a handover of the Red Fort to the descendant of the last Mughal emperor Bahadur Shah Zafar II.
Sultana Begum is the widow of the great-grandson of Bahadur Shah Zafar and demanded possession of Red Fort, claiming her late husband is a direct descendant of the original owners. She lives in Howrah, West Bengal.
Responding to her plea, Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna asked, "Why only Red Fort? Why not Fatehpur Sikri and Taj Mahal?"
Dismissing the petition as "misconceived", the CJI asked, "You want to argue this...?"
The British East India Company took over the Red Fort from the Mughals in 1857 following the First War of Indian Independence. Bahadur Shah Zafar was exiled to Burma and his properties were confiscated.
Sultana Begum suggested that if she should give up her claim over Red Fort, the government should provide her compensation from 1857 to till date for illegally possessing the monument.
In 2021, she had moved the Delhi High Court with the same demand. The woman claimed that the Centre had confirmed that her late husband, Mirza Mohammed Bedar Bakht, was the descendant and heir of Bahadur Shah Zafar in 1960. In line with this, the Union Ministry of Home Affairs began paying him pension. Following his death on May 22, 1980, the Centre started giving pensions to his widow, Sultana Begum, from August 1, 1980.
She went on to claim that the Centre illegally took control of her lawful property, violating her fundamental rights and rights under Article 300A of the Constitution.
Back then, the Delhi High Court had dismissed the petition and her appeal against that verdict was too rejected. A bench of Justice Rekha Palli scrapped the plea, saying there was a delay in filing the appeal. However, the woman's lawyer said the client is illiterate and ill, hence could not reach out. However, the judge said it was not a valid justification.
India