Allahabad HC To Pronounce Order Tomorrow On PIL Seeking Removal Of Mathura's Idgah Mosque, ASI Excavation Of Premises

A bench of Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker and Justice Ashutosh Srivastava reserved its verdict on the matter last month.

This PIL plea, moved by Advocate Mahek Maheshwari in 2020, was earlier dismissed in default in January 2021, however, the same was restored in March 2022.

It is the primary contention of the petitioner that various historical texts have recorded that the site in question was in fact Krishna Janam Bhumi and even the history of Mathura dates back to Ramayana Kaal and Islam came just 1500 years ago.

The petition has also contended that it is not a proper mosque as per Islamic jurisprudence as a mosque can't be built on forcibly acquired land and as per Hindu jurisprudence, a temple is a temple even if it is in ruins.

The background of the plea

The PIL plea has specifically prayed that the temple land should be handed over to the Hindus and a proper trust for Krishna Janmabhoomi Janmasthan be formed, for building a temple on the said land.

The plea also submits that Lord Krishna was born in the karagar of King Kans and the place of his birth lies beneath the present structure raised by the Shahi Idgah Trust.

It has been stated that in 1968, the Society Shree Krishna Janamasthan Seva Sangh entered into a compromise with the Committee of Management of Trust Masjid Idgah, conceding a considerable portion of property belonging to the deity to the latter.

Disputing the legality of this compromise, the Petition has submitted thus:

"The committee of Management of Trust Masjid Idgah entered into illegal compromise on 12.10.1968 (Twelve Ten Nineteen Sixty-Eight) with the Society Shree Krishna Janamasthan Seva Sangh and both have played fraud upon the Court, the plaintiff Deities and devotees with a view to capture and grab the property in question. In fact, Shree Krishna Janmbhoomi Trust is non-functional since 1958."

The petitioner has further claimed that the existence of Carved pillars and antiquities below the courtyard of the Shahi Idgah Mosque was reported by certain workers.

Against this backdrop, a prayer has been made in the PIL plea for a Court-monitored GPRS-based excavation by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) of the disputed structure, allegedly built over Krishna Janma Sthan.

It has been contended that Masjid is not an essential part of Islam and hence, the disputed land should be handed over to the Hindus for the exercise of their right to freely profess, practice, and propagate religion under Article 25 of the Constitution.

The plea also urges the court to strike down Sections 2,3, and 4 of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, as unconstitutional. It is stated that the impugned provisions abolish the pending suit/ proceedings in which the cause of action had arisen prior to August 15, 1947, and thus, the remedy available to the aggrieved person through the Court has been denied.

It is also submitted that provisions violate the doctrine of Hindu law that Temple property is never lost even if enjoyed by strangers for years and even the king cannot take away property as a deity is the embodiment of God and is a juristic person, represents 'Infinite- the timeless' and cannot be confined by the boundaries of time.

In related news, the Supreme Court is presently hearing a special leave petition filed by the mosque committee challenging a May 2023 order of the Allahabad High Court transferring to itself a clutch of suits over the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque dispute.

In May this year, the Allahabad High Court transferred to itself all the suits pending before the Mathura court praying for various reliefs pertaining to the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque dispute, allowing the transfer application filed by Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman and seven others. In the operative part of its order, a single-judge bench had observed thus:

"...Looking to the fact that as many as 10 suits are stated to be pending before the civil court and also there 25 should be more suits that can be said to be pending and issue can be said to be seminal public importance affected the masses beyond tribe and beyond communities having not proceeded an inch further since their institution on merits for past two to three years, provides full justification for withdrawal of all the suits touching upon the issue involved in the suit from the civil court concerned to this Court under Section 24(1)(b) CPC."

Last month, the apex court refused to entertain a plea by the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Mukti Nirman Trust seeking a scientific survey of Shahi Eidgah Masjid premises, leaving all questions relating to the ongoing land dispute open to the Allahabad High Court to decide.

Case title - Mehek Maheshwari v. Union of India and Others