The Supreme Court was informed that the mosque committee in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute should have pursued an intra-court appeal in the Allahabad High Court instead of approaching the apex court directly. The Hindu side claims the mosque was built on a temple site, while the mosque committee cites the 1991 Act prohibiting changes to religious sites.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Dec 9th was informed by the Hindu parties involved in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura that the mosque committee could have sought recourse through an intra-court appeal in the Allahabad High Court, instead of directly approaching the apex court.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar heard submissions from Advocate Barun Sinha, representing the Hindu side. Sinha emphasized that the plea filed by the Muslim side was not maintainable at this stage in the Supreme Court.
Read Also: ‘SC Must Stop The Lawsuits That Seek Survey of Mosques’: CPI(M)
Sinha pointed to Chapter 8 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, which permits a special appeal before a division bench of the high court against a single-judge order. “An appeal in the Supreme Court is not maintainable against the order of a single-judge bench of the high court. The mosque committee should have filed an intra-court appeal,” Sinha argued, seeking dismissal of the plea.
The dispute centers on claims by the Hindu side that the Aurangzeb-era Shahi Idgah mosque was built after demolishing a temple at the birthplace of Lord Krishna. Hindu litigants have filed suits seeking the mosque’s removal, alleging it violates their religious rights.
The mosque committee, on the other hand, contends that the Hindu suits violate the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This Act prohibits altering the religious character of any place of worship as it stood on August 15, 1947, except for the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, which was explicitly exempted.
The Allahabad High Court, however, ruled that the “religious character” of the Shahi Idgah mosque needed to be determined through both documentary and oral evidence.
The Supreme Court bench, while agreeing to hear the matter on December 9, observed that prima facie, an intra-court appeal against the August 1 high court order appeared to be the correct legal remedy. “We will certainly give you an opportunity to argue,” the CJI assured the mosque committee.
In its August 1 ruling, the high court stated:
- “Either the place is a temple or a mosque. It cannot have dual religious character.”
- The cases filed by the Hindu side are not barred by the Wakf Act, 1995, Places of Worship Act, 1991, or other relevant laws.
Read Also: Delhi High Court Stays BCI Directive on Sanjeev Nasiar: ‘I Welcome Any Inquiry’
The court also stated that the term “religious character” was not defined in the 1991 Act, making it essential to determine the character of the disputed site as of August 15, 1947.
The Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute in Mathura mirrors the ongoing legal battle over the Gyanvapi mosque and Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi, highlighting tensions over historical temple-mosque sites in India.
The Supreme Court’s eventual ruling on the Mathura case will be pivotal in shaping how such disputes are resolved under India’s legal framework.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
