Red Fort in India’s capital, Delhi was the residence of Mughal emperors for nearly 200 years, until 1857 when British took control over it after Sepoy Mutiny.
History was modified by Mughal rulers in India and everyone was made to believe that Shahjahan had built this palace during his tenure in between 1639 to 1648 AD by employing Ustad Ahmad Lahauri as chief architect.
But what they did was only few modifications and the original fort existed even before Mughals entered India.
See below pictures for proof of who originally built Red Fort in Delhi.
A stone tablet inside Red Fort by modern archaeologists proclaims that Shahjahan (who ruled from 1628 to 1658 AD) built this fort from 1639 to 1648 AD.
 |  |
But one can see the photo on right side (painting), of Shahjahan’s time preserved in the Bodleian Library, Oxford. It depicts Shajahan receiving the Persian ambassador inside the fort in 1628, the very year of Shahjahan’s accession. Obviously the fort existed much before Shahjahan.
This painting preserved in the Bodleian Library, Oxford, was reproduced in the Illustrated Weekly of India (page 32) of March 14, 1971. Since Shahjahan was in the fort in the year of his accession, this documentary evidence disproves the notion that he built the fort.
In Red Fort’s Khas Mahal, alias the King’s main apartment, one can find the royal emblem of its builder King Anangpal. It has of a pair of swords laid hilt to hilt curving upwards, the sacred Hindu pot (kalash) above the hilts, a lotus bud and a pair of scales of justice balanced over it. Dotted around are representations of the sun from whom Indian ruling dynasties claimed descent (Surya Vansh).
At the sword points are two small conches considered sacred in Hindu tradition. Bigger conches may be seen at the left and right corners at the base.
This royal Hindu insignia of the Hindu king who built Delhi’s Red Fort, is still there in the Khas Mahal pavilion. But even this visual symbol has been blatantly misinterpreted. The two swords laid hilt to hilt, curving upward are being inadvertently styled by ignorant guides, archaeologists and historians as an Islamic crescent. The sacred Hindu Kalash (water pot) on the hilts is never noticed.
The lotus bud on the kalash represents royal wealth. The pair of scales is symbol of impartial justice.
The above picture shows Hindu midday sun (from whom Hindu rulers claim descent, Suryavashi or Solar Dynasty rulers) in the arch above flanked by the sacred Hindu letter OM. Below it is the royal Hindu insignia which is shown their royal emblem. This proves the hollowness of the claim that Shahjahan commissioned the Red Fort.
Mughals made urdu inscriptions in gaps on these archs.
The life size statues of two elephants flanking the Delhi Gate (Delhi Darwaza) of Red Fort are an unmistakable sign of the fort’s Hindu origin. This is one of the proofs that the Red Fort was commissioned by Raja Anangpal in 1060 AD and not the Mogul emperor Shahjahan (1639-48 AD) as is erroneously believed.
The concept of building statues of elephants on forts and palace gates can be well judged by examining the palaces at Gwalior, Udaipur and Kota. Decorating homes, forts, palaces and temples with elephants is a hoary Hindu tradition. To the Hindu an elephant symbolizes might, power, glory and wealth.
There are statues of Hindu Mahavants riding the elephants of the doors of each interior room of “Khas Mahal” in the Red Fort.
One can see close up of the elephant and rider door knob in the Khas Mahal of the Red Fort in Delhi (in right side of picture above). This is a typically Hindu motif. Other big life-size stone elephants decorating the Naqqar Khana (Music House) gate were slaughtered by invaders. The chopped up pieces may still be seen stored in the Khas Mahal basements.
Above picture is the inner view of the entrance to the so-called Moti Masjid inside Delhi’s Red Fort.
The archaeological tablet outside claims that the mosque was built by Aurangzeb, son and successor of Shahjahan. That claim is baseless because :
The entrance is of a temple design.
The arch between the domes is made of banana bunches used in Hindu worship.
On either side above the arch are trays holding five fruits each as holy Hindu offering. Fruit is taboo inside Muslim mosques.
Naming buildings after gems (Moti means pearl) is a Hindu custom.
If Shahjahan built the fort why didn’t he provide it with a mosque ?
The truncated Hindu perambulatory passage may still be seen to exist on the building’s left flank.
The back of the wall shows signs of tampering.
Above pictures is a temple-front design of ribbed gourd-like domes on either side with a pinnacle surmounted by a canopy in the centre, embossed on the riverside wall of the Rang Mahal apartment inside Delhi’s Red fort is emphatic proof that the fort is a pre-Shahjahan Hindu fort.
Even the name Rang Mahal is Hindu.
In this same pavilion is carved on the floor an exquisite lotus in full bloom as a fountain trough.
Muslim rulers have built walls and floors which are plain.
The canopy in the photo may be seen at several Hindu altars. The kalash (pot) under it represents divinity in Hindu (Vedic) tradition.
The perforated marble screens (Jaalees or netred screens) inside the Khas Mahal and Rang Mahal are mentioned even while describing palaces in Ramayana.
The Tomar dynasty founded Lal Kot in 736. The Prithviraj Raso names the Tomar Anangpal as the founder of Lal Kot, whose name is inscribed on Iron Pillar of Delhi at Qutb complex, ascribed to Chandra or Chandragupta II.
Lal Kot (means Red Fort) at Mehrauli, Delhi, was built by tomar dynasty and its ruins are still seen with red colored stones.