Prayagraj: The Allahabad High Court on Thursday (August 1) rejected the Muslim side plea challenging maintainability of Hindu side plea seeking seeking the “removal” of the Shahi Idgah mosque located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura.
Justice Mayank Kumar Jain upheld maintainability of all 18 suits.
High Court verdict has come on a plea by Muslim side challenging maintainability of pleas filed by Hindu side
The High Court verdict has come on a plea by Muslim side challenging the maintainability of pleas filed by the Hindu side seeking the “removal” of the Shahi Idgah mosque located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura, claiming that the Aurangazeb-era mosque was built after the demolition of the temple.
The Hindu side has filed over 15 pleas seeking the “removal” of the Shahi Idgah mosque from the 13.37-acre complex it shares with the Katra Keshav Dev temple in Mathura and possession of the Shahi Idgah premises.
What did the Muslim side argue?
The Muslim side – represented by the mosque management committee and UP Sunni Central Waqf Board – argued before the High Court that the pleas filed the Hindu side seeking removal of the Shahi Idgah mosque and possession of the Shahi Idgah premises are barred under the Places of Worship Act, Limitation Act and Specific Relief Act and thus, the pleas not maintainable.
The Muslim side has further said that both sides had entered into a compromise on October 12, 1968 in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah mosque dispute between the Hindu and Muslim sides and that compromise was confirmed in a civil suit decided in 1974 and since the limitation to challenge a compromise is three years, the suits filed by the Hindu side in 2020 is barred by limitation.
What did the Hindu side argue?
The Hindu side has rejected the arguments made by the Muslim side and has said that suits filed by it are not barred under any laws, as argued by the Muslim side, and pleas seeking removal of the Shahi Idgah mosque from the complex is maintainable.
The Hindu side has further argued that the Places of Worship Act applies only in the case of undisputed structure and this Act does not apply in the case of a disputed structure, as in the present case and that the Places of Worship Act, Limitation Act and Waqf Act are not applicable in this dispute.
The Hindu side has also argued that the claimed compromise between both sides in 1968 was a fraud by Sunni Central Waqf Board and the mosque committee. It further argued that the Sri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan was not empowered to make the claimed compromise by entering into any such pact with the Muslim side, as the object of the Sansthan was only to manage day-to-day activities of the temple.
High Court earlier allowed court-monitored survey of Shahi Idgah complex in December last year
The High Court, while hearing a plea filed by the deity (Bhagwan Sri Krishna Virajman) and seven others seeking a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah complex, had earlier on December 14 last year agreed to the appointment of an advocate commissioner to oversee the survey of the Shahi Idgah premises.
Supreme Court stayed implementation of High Court order
The Supreme Court, however, stayed the implementation of the High Court order on a plea filed by the Muslim side before the top court challenging the High Court order directing the court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah complex. The top court later extended interim stay on the implementation of the High Court order till August, when the matter is scheduled to come up for hearing before the top court.
The apex court, while staying the implementation of the High Court order, had directed that the proceedings in the dispute, including the maintainability of the suit under Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) will continue before the High Court.
The High Court earlier had transferred to itself all cases related to the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah mosque dispute pending before Mathura court.
