Shahi Idgah case Highlights | Allahabad HC to hear 18 petitions filed by Hindu side today

RECAP | Here is all you need to know before the high court hearing begins

- In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court on August 1 rejected the objections filed by the Muslim side to the maintainability of the suits filed by the Hindu petitioners mainly pertaining to the claim over the entire land on which the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi and Shahi Idgah Mosque are located.

- A single judge bench comprising Justice Mayank Kumar Jain ruled that the 18 petitions filed by the Hindu side in the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Mosque dispute were maintainable.

- The Muslim side had challenged the maintainability of the suits filed by the Hindu petitioners and the deity on the ground that they had been barred under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991.

- The court said that all the 18 petitions filed by the Hindu side would be heard together from August 12.

- The Muslim side’s lawyer said that he would challenge the decision in the Supreme Court.

- Vishnu Shankar Jain, one of the lawyers of the Hindu petitioners, said that now the trial in the case would start. He also said that the Hindu petitioners would approach the Supreme Court to get the stay vacated on the order of a survey of the land by an Advocate Commission.

SC extends stay till Nov on court-monitored survey of Shahi Idgah mosque complex in Mathura

The Supreme Court on august 9 extended its stay till November on the operation of the Allahabad High Court order that allowed a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah mosque complex adjoining the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Sanjay Kumar ordered continuation of the stay the apex court had imposed on January 16 on the operation of the December 14, 2023 order of the high court.

Hindu litigants file caveat in SC in Mathura temple-mosque dispute

The Hindu litigants have filed a caveat in the Supreme Court seeking a hearing if the Muslim side approaches it challenging a recent order of the Allahabad High Court which rejected a plea against the maintainability of 18 cases related to the temple-mosque dispute in Mathura.

The caveat has been filed through advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain to ensure that no ex-parte order is passed against the Hindu litigants if the other group moves the top court.

A caveat application is filed by a litigant to ensure that no adverse order is passed against him or her without being heard.

On August 1, the high court had rejected a plea challenging the maintainability of 18 cases related to the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura, and ruled that the religious character of the mosque needs to be determined.

The Mathura dispute mirrors the legal tussle in Varanasi, where the Gyanvapi mosque and the Kashi Vishwanath temple are located next to each other.

Last December, the Allahabad High Court had dismissed pleas challenging the maintainability of a 1991 suit seeking the restoration of a temple where the Gyanvapi mosque stands.

"Either the Gyanvapi compound has a Hindu religious character or a Muslim religious character. It can't have dual character at the same time," Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal had then said, while ruling that the Varanasi case was not barred under the Places of Worship Act.

What have the Hindu petitioners claimed?

The Hindu petitioners have claimed ownership over the entire 13.37 acres of land on which the complex is situated. They have also challenged the 1968 agreement between the Shahi Idgah Mosque Committee and the Shrikrishna Janmabhoomi Trust allowing the mosque to continue to exist and use the land on which it is situated.

The Hindu petitioners contended that the Shahi Idgah Mosque had been built by the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb after demolishing a part of the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi.

RECAP | Cases relating to Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute maintainable: Allahabad High Court

The Muslim side challenged the maintainability of the suits filed by the Hindu petitioners and the deity on the ground that they had been barred under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991. The court said that all the 18 petitions filed by the Hindu side would be heard together from August 12.

Read more