The Allahabad High Court has rescheduled the hearing in the Krishna Janmabhoomi–Shahi Idgah dispute to September 26. The matter, involving claims over the birthplace of Lord Krishna, continues to remain one of the most closely watched legal battles.
Today, On 28th April,In the Krishna Janmabhoomi–Shahi Idgah dispute, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court order allowing the Hindu side to amend their plea, stating, “One thing is clear, amendment must be allowed,” while hearing the appeal filed by the Muslim side against the High Court order allowing the amendment.
The Karnataka High Court urged Parliament and State legislatures to bring in a Uniform Civil Code. The Court stated that such a code would uphold justice for women and promote equality across all castes and religions. It emphasized the importance of individual dignity and fraternity. The suggestion aims to foster a more unified and fair legal framework for all citizens.
Members of Parliament (MPs), led by senior advocate Kapil Sibal, Today (Dec 13) moved an impeachment motion against Justice Shekhar Kumar Yadav of the Allahabad High Court. The motion was submitted to the Rajya Sabha Secretary-General in response to remarks by Justice Yadav that have been perceived as targeting the Muslim community. This initiative, supported by the signatures of 55 MPs, is anticipated to be discussed during the ongoing Winter Session of Parliament.
The Atala mosque, located in Uttar Pradesh’s Jaunpur, has moved the Allahabad High Court challenging a local court’s May 2024 order that allowed the registration of a suit which claims that the mosque was originally an ancient temple referred to as ‘Atala Devi mandir’. The mosque has challenged a suit pending before a local court in which the plaintiffs have sought a declaration that the disputed property is the ‘Atala Devi Mandir.’ Hearing on Dec 9.
A Muslim man has filed a habeas corpus petition in the Bombay High Court seeking the release of his Hindu partner from a government shelter. The petition claims her detention violates her fundamental rights, citing moral policing and interference from her parents. It asserts she entered a consensual relationship and requests police protection for the couple against potential threats.
