Sambhal (Uttar Pradesh) [India] January 5 : Advocate Ashwani Upadhyay has firmly addressed issues surrounding the Waqf Act, the reopening of the Sambhal Temple, and the broader concerns related to Sanatan Dharma.
Speaking to ANI, Upadhyay expressed his strong views about the sacred significance of Sambhal for Hindus.
"This place is very sacred for us. Sambhal is as holy as our four Dhams. Sambhal holds the same sanctity for us as our Sapt Puria and the twelve Jyoti Lingas. It is as revered as our 51 Shakti Peeths. This is why Sambhal's soul has always been here," he said, adding, "And now, it is heartening that during the era of slavery, the symbols of our Sanatan culture that were suppressed are now emerging again. For this, I thank Yogi Ji."
The advocate's statements took a sharp turn as he addressed the controversial Waqf Act and the Place of Worship Act, which he claims have been used to legitimize land grabs and invasion-era wrongs.
"We have also challenged the Place of Worship and Waqf Act at the Supreme Court. Many laws were made to ruin India. The Place of Worship Act and Waqf Act were created to legalize the illegal acts of invaders like Babur, Humayun, Tughlaq, Ghazni, and Ghori, and to promote land grabs in India," Upadhyay stated with conviction.
"We are now witnessing the rise of our Sanatan culture once more. The Waqf Act was designed to legalize land jihad," he added. He also criticized religious-based systems, emphasizing, "Systems run based on religion, like boards, tribunals, ministries, and schemes, are all unconstitutional. The Constitution means equal laws for all."
Upadhyay's criticism extended to the legal framework and its inequalities. "The laws based on religion, the loans being given on that basis, and the benefits provided are against the essence of the Constitution," he argued, expressing hope for the swift introduction of a uniform civil code.
The advocate also shared his stance on the temple restoration movement. "In 2020, we challenged the Place of Worship Act. After that, the path for temple reconstruction opened across the country. Surveys have been conducted at 18 places so far, and evidence of temples has been found at all 18 locations," he revealed. He called for the reclamation of sites demolished by invaders, stating, "Our stance is that the sites demolished by Ghazni, Ghori, and others should be reclaimed, as it is our duty to restore our Sanatan heritage."
Drawing inspiration from historical sacrifices, Upadhyay referenced figures like Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and Guru Gobind Singh Ji.
"Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji sacrificed his life, Guru Gobind Singh Ji gave his entire family, and great figures like Sambhaji Maharaj and Shivaji Maharaj made immense sacrifices to protect these sacred places. Now that we are free, it is our duty to restore them," he said.
He was quick to clarify that the current disputes are not based on religion but on the restoration of India's cultural and historical identity.
"This is not a Hindu-Muslim issue; it is about India's sovereignty and the foreign invaders," Upadhyay said.
"People here should not misunderstand it as a communal conflict. Some families like Owaisi's, with foreign roots, like the Madni family from Medina and the Bukhari family from Bukhara, incite Indian Muslims, who are essentially converted Hindus, for their political agendas."
Upadhyay also pointed out that the foreign-origin figures who manipulate Indian Muslims are increasingly being exposed. "These foreign-origin individuals are misleading and manipulating India's Muslims, but awareness is growing among people," he said.
The advocate reiterated the importance of temple restoration and the eradication of remnants from India's colonial past. "Until the remnants of slavery are erased, true restoration is not possible," he said firmly, adding, "Temples are not being broken but restored because they were destroyed during slavery. Offering Namaz in a temple does not make it a mosque, just as reciting Hanuman Chalisa in a mosque does not make it a temple."
Upadhyay also addressed the issue of religious practices in contested sites, stating that offering Namaz in a temple does not convert it into a mosque, just as reciting the Hanuman Chalisa in a mosque does not make it a temple. His comments reflect a broader call for clarity on the relationship between religious spaces in India and their rightful restoration to their original purpose.
Advocate Ashwani Upadhyay's remarks reflect a deep commitment to restoring India's historical, cultural, and religious legacy, with an emphasis on national unity and sovereignty. Through legal challenges, public awareness, and a strong call for the re-establishment of Sanatan Dharma, Upadhyay continues to advocate for a unified, just, and proud India.