The Allahabad High Court dismissed a plea seeking the use of 'disputed structure' instead of 'Shahi Eidgah Mosque' in Mathura case proceedings.
The Supreme Court of India has extended its stay on a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex in Mathura, which is located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple. The court deferred the hearing on a plea against the survey to April 1, while the interim order staying the survey will continue to operate. The Hindu side claims that the mosque complex holds signs of a temple that once existed at the site, while the Muslim side contends that the lawsuits filed by the Hindu litigants violate the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.
The "compromise" between Sri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan and Shahi Masjid Idgah made in 1968 was also challenged in the suit, according to lawyers.
The court said the modalities of the survey will be discussed at the next hearing on December 18.
The Allahabad High Court has rejected an application to implead goddess Radha Rani as a party in the Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah title dispute. The court ruled that puranic illustrations are considered hearsay evidence and the applicant failed to provide concrete evidence supporting the claim of joint ownership.
The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a batch of petitions challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits lawsuits to reclaim a place of worship or change its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947. The pleas, including one filed by Ashwini Upadhyay, argue that these provisions violate the right to judicial remedy and create an arbitrary cut-off date. The matter will be heard in the backdrop of several ongoing cases related to places of worship, including the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura. The Muslim side has cited the 1991 law to argue that such suits are not maintainable. The Supreme Court had previously sought the Centre's response to Upadhyay's petition, which alleged that the law creates an "arbitrary and irrational retrospective cut-off date" for maintaining the character of places of worship.
"Interim orders wherever granted shall continue. Re-list in first half of April, 2024," the bench said in its order and directed the parties to complete the pleadings by then.
The Committee of Management, Shahi Jama Masjid, moved the high court challenging the suit and the Sambhal court order which directed the survey through an advocate commissioner.
The fast-track court of the civil judge (senior division) has posted the matter to April 17 for further hearing.
The Allahabad high court Thursday directed the lower court concerned to decide within four months the temporary injunction application as well as a plea for bunching together the trial in all pending cases related to the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah mosque dispute.
The objections against the suit were raised by the management committee of the mosque and the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board.
The Supreme Court on Friday rejected a plea challenging an Allahabad high court order dismissing a PIL seeking a direction to the Uttar Pradesh government to acquire the Krishna Janmabhoomi Janmasthan at Mathura and hand it over to the Hindus for worshipping Lord Krishna.
The Supreme Court's 2023 order refusing to stay a scientific survey at the Gyanvapi Mosque complex has sparked claims over several other disputed places of worship across India. This has led to several court cases, including one in Mathura where a survey of the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex was ordered, and another in Ajmer where a claim was made that a Shiva temple existed within the dargah of Sufi saint Moinuddin Chishti. The article also highlights a dispute over the Bhojshala in Madhya Pradesh, which Hindus consider a temple and Muslims consider a mosque. The Supreme Court's order has reignited debates about the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits the change of character of religious places as they existed on August 15, 1947.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta stayed the implementation of the December 14, 2023, order by which it had agreed to the appointment of a court commissioner to oversee the survey of the mosque premises which, the Hindu side claims, hold signs suggesting that it was a temple once. However, the apex court made it clear that proceedings before the high court in the dispute including the maintainability of the suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) will continue.
Can ordinary citizens counter this backward march? Can peace activists ensure that the two communities retain their bonds? Do they have a choice, asks Jyoti Punwani.
The apex court rejected an appeal challenging a July 10 decision of the Allahabad high court which had also dismissed the plea finding no error or illegality in the order of a Mathura civil judge who had decided to first hear the issue of maintainability of the suit as raised by management committee of the mosque.
The Supreme Court on Friday agreed to hear an appeal of the Gyanvapi management committee against an Allahabad High Court order which held that lawsuits for "restoration" of a temple where the mosque stands in Varanasi are maintainable.
The plaintiffs had filed a suit in the lower court which had observed that they didn't have the right to sue.
The Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha's had given a call for reciting Hanuman Chalisa inside the Shahi Masjid Idgah to mark the anniversary of the Babri Mosque demolition.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked the Centre to file its reply to a batch of PILs challenging the validity of certain provisions of a 1991 law that prohibit filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.
The petitioner submitted an application in the court of the Civil Judge on Monday seeking permission for 'purification' of the sanctum sanctorum of the Keshav Dev temple, which he claimed was inside the mosque, his counsel said.
The Supreme Court on Tuesday granted time till October 31 to the Centre to file its response to a batch of pleas challenging certain provisions of a 1991 law that prohibits filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.
Its workers are on their toes to win over the voters once again, with idea of 'Amrit Kaal'.
The Supreme Court will hear on April 5 a batch of PILs challenging the validity of certain provisions of a 1991 law that prohibits filing of a lawsuit to reclaim a place of worship or seek a change in its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947.
Four people have been booked for making objectionable and inflammatory posts on social media sites, officials said on Friday.
The hearing of the civil suit filed in a Mathura court seeking ownership of the entire 13.37 acres of Krishna Janmabhoomi land has been adjourned till December 10, after the plaintiff in the case, Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust, failed to appear before the court on Wednesday.
The Akhil Bharatiya Tirath Purohit Mahasabha and the Mathur Chaturved Parishad pleaded to be made respondents in the case. They said the suit for the removal of the mosque should not be allowed as it is detrimental to communal harmony in the country, according to their counsels.
'During the nine years of BJP rule, not a single temple has been reconstructed.' 'They might have constructed the Ram temple as it is an emotional issue. But they are not much interested in issues like heritage.'
The Places of Worship Act is 'An Act to prohibit conversion of any place of worship and to provide for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on the 15th day of August 1947, and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto'.
Krishna chants gained more currency when Samajwadi Party chief Akhilesh Yadav invoked the deity.
A magnificent Krishna Janambhoomi temple in Mathura was a recurrent theme for the ruling BJP in the run-up to the assembly polls, reports Nitin Kumar.
© 2026 Rediff.com - Investor Information - Advertise with us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy - Sitemap - Feedback - About us - Terms of use - Grievances