Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute: Allahabad HC dismisses Muslim party’s challenge to maintainability of Hindu side’s suits

Allahabad HC dismisses petition filed by mosque committee

What’s the story

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday dismissed the petition filed by the Mathura-based Shahi Eidgah (mosque) committee.

The petition had challenged the maintainability of 18 lawsuits initiated by Hindu devotees and deity Shree Krishna Virajman seeking worship rights and even the removal of the mosque from the 13.37-acre complex, which it shares with the Katra Keshav Dev temple.

Notably, Justice Mayank Kumar Jain’s bench delivered the verdict about two months after reserving it on June 6.

Why does this story matter?

Multiple cases are pending before courts on the Shahi Idgah-Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute.

Hindu petitioners claim that the Shahi Idgah mosque is built on the ruins of a temple marking the Lord Krishna’s birthplace.

The petitioners present lotus carvings and shapes resembling the “sheshnag” as evidence that the mosque was built over a temple.

In December last year, the HC granted a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah mosque.

This came after the Archeological Survey of India surveyed Varanasi’s Gyanvapi Mosque.

Rejects Muslim side’s plea

Decision paves way for trial

Rejecting the Muslim side’s plea challenging the Hindu lawsuits based on the Places of Worship Act 1991, the Limitation Act 1963, and the Specific Relief Act 1963, Justice Jain’s bench ruled that all 18 suits are maintainable.

This decision paves the way for a trial.

The court found that the Hindu worshippers’ and deity’s suits are not barred by any of the acts cited by the Muslim side.

What are the arguments on both sides

During arguments in February-June 2024, the Hindu side claimed that the Shahi Idgah had unlawfully occupied the land, asserting that it does not belong to the Waqf board and is subject to the Ancient Monuments Protection Act 1958.

The mosque committee, however, argued that a compromise was reached in 1968 and that they possess the land.

They contended that the suit is barred by the Limitation Act and the Places of Worship Act since the mosque was built in 1669-70.

_{Images are for reference only.Images and contents gathered automatic from google or 3rd party sources.All rights on the images and contents are with their legal original owners.}