The High Court of Delhi, on 13^th December 2024 dismissed the appeal preferred by Sultana Begum, who purportedly claimed to be a lineal descendant of the last Mughal Emperor, Bahadur Shah Zafar, seeking possession of the Red Fort and compensation for its alleged wrongful occupation. The Division Bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela dismissed the appeal, holding it barred by limitation due to an inordinate delay of over 900 days in filing the appeal.

The appeal was filed challenging an order of a single judge, wherein the writ petition filed by the appellant had been dismissed on the ground of laches, observing that the cause of action had arisen over 164 years ago. The appellant had asserted her entitlement to the Red Fort based on her purported lineage, claiming that the property was unlawfully taken from the family of Bahadur Shah Zafar by the British East India Company following the events of 1857. It was contended that the possession of the Red Fort by the Government of India amounted to an illegal occupation, for which the appellant sought restoration of possession and consequential compensation.

The Division Bench, while deciding, observed that the appellant had cited personal reasons, including ill health and the demise of her daughter, to justify the delay. The Court, however, held that these reasons were inadequate to condone the inordinate delay. The Bench remarked: "The delay of such magnitude cannot be condoned in the absence of cogent and compelling reasons."

In its judgment, the Bench observed that the appellant’s claim was irreparably vitiated by laches and acquiescence, reiterating the legal maxim that "equity aids the vigilant and not those who slumber on their rights." Even assuming the veracity of the appellant’s assertions regarding her lineage and the alleged dispossession by the East India Company, the Court held that the extraordinary lapse of 164 years rendered the claim legally untenable.

The Delhi High Court emphasized: "Judicial forums are not equipped to adjudicate disputes arising from distant historical events, particularly where no plausible justification has been provided for the delay in approaching the court." The Division Bench endorsed the findings of the Single Judge that the cause of action, if any, had arisen in 1857, and the predecessors of the appellant were fully aware of the alleged dispossession. The Court held that the appellant’s claim, rooted in colonial-era events, bore no contemporary legal relevance.

The Bench also noted that the Red Fort is a national monument of immense historical and cultural significance, presently administered by the Government of India. It observed that disrupting its current status would conflict with considerations of public interest and governance. The Court stated: "Such claims, even if predicated upon historical rights, cannot override considerations of public policy and national heritage."

The Bench while dismissing the application for condonation of delay and the appeal observed: "The appellant has failed to make out any case warranting interference with the well-reasoned order of the single judge."

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed in limine as being barred by limitation, with no order as to costs.

Case Title: Sultana Begum Vs Union of India & Anr.

Case No: LPA- 1204/2024

Bench: Acting Chief Justice Vibhu Bakhru and Justice Tushar Rao Gedela