A civil court in Budaun, Uttar Pradesh, will hear a plea regarding the alleged existence of the Neelkanth temple at the Jama Masjid Shamsi site on January 18, 2025. The dispute centers around claims made by Mukesh Patel of the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, with significant implications for communal harmony and historical narrative.
Today, On 12th December, the Supreme Court instructed all courts to refrain from handling cases regarding surveys of religious sites under the Places of Worship Act, 1991. This decision seeks to maintain communal harmony and secularism while reviewing several petitions challenging the Act’s provisions, emphasizing legal consistency and caution in sensitive matters.
Today, On 12th December, Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna directed that no additional suits be registered until the next hearing regarding the Places of Worship Act, 1991, which prohibits changes to religious structures from before India’s independence. Ongoing legal challenges question the Act’s constitutionality, emphasizing the importance of maintaining communal harmony.
RJD Member Manoj Kumar Jha filed an intervention petition in the Supreme Court, asserting that the Places of Worship Act, 1991, does not violate constitutional rights and is essential for preserving India’s secular values. The Act protects places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947, amidst increasing sectarian tensions.
Today, Petitioners seek removal of the mosque in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh, claiming it stands on Lord Krishna’s birthplace. Supreme Court to hear Shahi Idgah Masjid’s challenge to Allahabad High Court ruling on Sept 17. Disputed land’s history and legal battles between Hindu and Muslim parties continue with intricate details and ongoing hearings.
The Allahabad High Court reserved its verdict on the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah mosque dispute, challenging the legality of the suits filed. The lawsuits seek the removal of the mosque, claiming it stands on the site of a demolished temple. The Muslim side argues that the suits are time-barred and should be dismissed. Senior advocate Manish Goyal has been appointed as amicus curiae in the matter, and the court is yet to address several issues.
The Hindu petitioners on Monday in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute argue that the Places of Worship Act does not apply to a disputed structure. They challenge the 1968 compromise and maintain that the suit is maintainable and that evidence needs to be presented. The lawsuit also revisits historical claims about the mosque’s existence. The legal and historical complexities are becoming more evident as the court postpones further discussions.