In the ongoing Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute, the Hindu side has informed the Allahabad High Court that the temple is recognized as a protected monument under the the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
![[Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Dispute] Temple is a Protected Monument Under 1958 Act, Hindu Side Tells HC](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/MicrosoftTeams-image-35.png?resize=820%2C461&ssl=1)
Prayagraj: On 2nd May, In the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute, the Hindu side presented its arguments before the Allahabad High Court in Prayagraj. They emphasized that the temple should be recognized as a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958.
READ ALSO: [Krishna-Janmabhoomi- Shahi Idgah] Deity Not Involved in Compromise, Hindu Side Tells HC
The counsel for the Hindu side also contended that the Places of Worship Act should not be applicable to this case. The hearing revolves around a plea challenging the suit seeking the removal of the Shahi mosque situated adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura.
The case is being heard by Justice Mayank Kumar Jain, who is currently addressing the Muslim side’s concerns regarding the suit’s maintainability. Justice Jain further stated that the fundamental right to worship cannot be curtailed by the law of limitation and emphasized that both the deity and devotees have the right to be heard.
The next hearing is scheduled for May 7, during which the Muslim side will present its arguments following the completion of the Hindu side’s submissions.
During the previous hearing, the Hindu side presented its stance, stating that the deity was not a party to the compromise claimed by the Sri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan. They argued that the Sansthan, which is responsible for managing the temple’s day-to-day activities, lacked the authority to enter into such a compromise. The Hindu side firmly believes that the compromise is invalid.
Advocate Taslima Aziz Ahmadi, representing the Muslim side, countered the Hindu side’s claims by asserting that the suit is barred by the law of limitation. Ahmadi mentioned that the parties had reached a compromise on October 12, 1968, which was confirmed in a civil suit decided in 1974. According to her, the limitation to challenge a compromise is three years, and since the present suit was filed in 2020, it is barred by limitation.
Background
The Management Trust of Shahi Masjid Idgah in Mathura argued in court that the lawsuits demanding the mosque’s removal are not legally valid, pointing to laws that protect the mosque. Advocate Tasneem Ahmadi, stated that the mosque has been acknowledged as existing since before 1968, challenging the grounds of the plaintiffs’ claims.
The matter followed a 1968 agreement between the Shree Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sangh and the mosque’s management, which settled the land dispute between them. Advocate Ahmadi mentioned that it’s too late for this agreement now, and even in the worst-case scenario where the mosque was built after 1968, time limits would prevent the lawsuit from proceeding.
The lawsuit also revisits historical claims that the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb destroyed a temple to build the mosque in 1669. Ahmadi argues that this point itself proves the mosque’s existence beyond that date, limiting legal action due to time constraints.
Furthermore, the legal challenge includes debates over the Places of Worship Act, with some plaintiffs arguing against its constitutionality. However, Ahmadi maintains that constitutional issues cannot be introduced in private legal disputes and that only those who possess property can seek legal protection for it.
As the court postpones further discussions, the legal and historical complexities of the dispute between Krishna Janmabhumi and Shahi Eidgah Mosque are becoming more evident.
During the proceedings, Taslima Aziz Ahmadi, the counsel representing the Muslim Community, presented her arguments via video conference, claiming that the suit is time-barred.
READ ALSO: HC to Hear Plea on Shahi Idgah Mosque- Krishna Janmabhoomi Removal Suit on Apr 4
They further asserted that the suit was filed to obtain possession of the land after the “removal” of the Shahi Idgah mosque and to restore the Katra Keshav Deo temple, as well as to seek a permanent injunction.
The plea in the suit acknowledges the existence of the mosque structure and states that the committee of management is currently in possession of it.
READ PREVIOUS REPORTS ON KRISHNA-JANMABHOOMI
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
