The Supreme Court on Tuesday (September 17, 2024) asked the Muslim side in the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute case of Mathura to tell whether it can challenge the August 1 decision before the division bench of Allahabad High Court. The court asked this question to the Muslim side on the objection of a lawyer of the Hindu side. The Muslim side has challenged the August 1 decision of the single bench of Allahabad High Court in the Supreme Court. The lawyer objected to this and said that objection can be raised as per the understanding of the division bench of the High Court.
On August 1, the High Court judge rejected the Muslim side’s plea, terming 18 petitions of the Hindu side related to the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura as admissible. The Muslim side had filed a petition against hearing on these petitions. The bench of Justice Sanjeev Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar was initially inclined to issue notice to the Hindu parties on the petition filed by the Muslim parties against the August 1 order of the High Court. However, later it listed the matter for further hearing on November 4.
Senior advocates Madhavi Divan and Vishnu Shankar Jain, appearing for the Hindu side, said that the Supreme Court had earlier stayed the implementation of the order and appointed a court commissioner to survey the Idgah complex and now it should be vacated. The court said that there are many legal complications in this case, which need to be considered in depth. It directed that all pending cases related to the dispute will be heard together.
A lawyer of the Hindu side objected to filing a petition before the Supreme Court and argued that the order of August 1 can be challenged before the division bench of the High Court. Agreeing with the argument, the bench asked senior advocate Tasneem Ahmadi, appearing for the Committee of Management Trust of Shahi Masjid Idgah, to tell the court whether they can file a petition before its division bench against the order of the single bench of the High Court on August 1.
The bench said, ‘We think you (Muslim side) can do this. There are some orders of this court, which allow you to do this. If you can do this then this petition needs to be withdrawn.’ On August 1, a single bench of the High Court dismissed the petition challenging the admissibility of 18 cases related to the temple-mosque dispute in Mathura. The bench had ruled that the religious character of Shahi Idgah needs to be determined.
The High Court had rejected the argument of the Muslim side that the cases filed by the Hindu parties regarding the dispute related to the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex adjacent to the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi temple violate the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, so they are not admissible for hearing. This Act, implemented in the year 1991, prohibits changing the religious character of any place of worship existing on the day of independence of the country. Only the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute was kept out of its scope.
The lawsuits filed by the Hindu side have sought the removal of the Aurangzeb-era mosque, saying it was built after demolishing a temple. The High Court had said in its verdict that the 1991 Act does not define the term religious character and the disputed place cannot have a dual religious character – a temple and a mosque, which are contrary to each other. High Court judge Mayank Kumar Jain had said, ‘This place is either a temple or a mosque. Thus, I think that the religious character of the disputed place as it existed on August 15, 1947 should be determined on the basis of documentary and oral evidence presented by both the parties.’
