image credit -jagran josh
Sandeep Singh
In the heart of the ancient city of Mathura lies a dispute that has captured the attention of both legal scholars and the general public – the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque case. This contentious issue, which dates back decades, recently took a new turn when the Supreme Court issued a stern reminder to the Allahabad High Court, raising questions about the handling of this long-standing legal battle.
The Background
The Shahi Eidgah mosque was constructed on the orders of Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb, situated adjacent to the Krishna Janmasthan Temple. This temple is believed to be the sacred place where the Hindu deity Lord Krishna was born. In 1968, a ‘compromise agreement’ was brokered between the Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, responsible for managing the temple, and the Trust Shahi Masjid Eidgah, allowing both places of worship to coexist harmoniously. However, the validity of this agreement has recently come under scrutiny, leading to a flurry of legal actions regarding the Krishna Janmabhoomi.
The Supreme Court’s Intervention
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Sudhanshu Dhulia is currently presiding over a special leave petition filed by the mosque committee. They are challenging a May 2023 order of the Allahabad High Court, which transferred a cluster of suits related to the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque dispute to itself. The Supreme Court’s involvement in this matter is crucial, as it aims to streamline the proceedings and avoid unnecessary delays.
During the previous court session, the bench indicated that it would be in the best interest of all parties involved if the high court took charge of the matter. This suggestion aimed to prevent the ‘disquiet’ caused by multiple ongoing proceedings and the prolonged uncertainty surrounding the dispute. The Supreme Court also requested specific details from the high court registry about the civil suits that were directed to be consolidated and transferred from the trial court.
A Reminder Ignored
In a recent twist, the Supreme Court has expressed its dissatisfaction. Despite its earlier directive, no information or documents have been received from the Allahabad High Court’s registry. Frustrated by this lack of response, the court adjourned the hearing until October 30 and issued a stern reminder, instructing that the previous order be forwarded to the high court’s registry.
The Outsiders’ Perspective
Advocate Tasneem Ahmadi, representing the mosque committee, has raised concerns about the recent surge in litigation. She pointed out that this wave of legal action appears to be initiated by ‘outsiders,’ even though Hindus and Muslims have lived in peaceful coexistence in the region for the past five decades. She emphasized, “For the last 50 years, both communities have been living in peace. There has never been a problem. It’s only now that these suits are being filed by outsiders who have either formed these trusts or taken over trusts that existed.”
Furthermore, Ahmadi highlighted the considerable distance between Mathura and Allahabad, urging the court to consider relocating the proceedings to a site closer to the mosque’s location. She explained that the management committee lacked the financial means to cover the nearly 600-kilometer journey from Mathura to Allahabad for trial purposes.
The Complex Jurisdiction
Responding to the logistical challenges, Justice Kaul acknowledged the issues surrounding the distance but noted the complexity of the jurisdiction. He stated, “This is a problem of the benches in Allahabad and Lucknow. Places proximate to Lucknow, because of our jurisdiction, continue to be covered by the Allahabad bench. That is an unfortunate consequence, but no one wants to make a hard decision there.”
FAQs
1. What is the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah Mosque dispute?
- The dispute revolves around the Krishna Janmasthan Temple and the Shahi Eidgah Mosque built adjacent to it. It centers on the coexistence of these two places of worship and the validity of a 1968 ‘compromise agreement.’
2. Why did the Supreme Court issue a reminder to the Allahabad High Court?
- The Supreme Court issued a reminder to the Allahabad High Court’s registry due to the lack of information and documents regarding the ongoing dispute, despite a previous order requesting this information.
3. Who is initiating the recent litigation in the case, according to Advocate Tasneem Ahmadi?
- Advocate Tasneem Ahmadi has alleged that the recent spate of litigation is being initiated by ‘outsiders’ who have either formed trusts or taken over existing ones, despite Hindus and Muslims having lived in harmony in the region for the last 50 years.
4. What is the suggested solution for the logistical challenges posed by the distance between Mathura and Allahabad?
- Advocate Tasneem Ahmadi has urged the court to consider relocating the proceedings to a location closer to the mosque, given the financial constraints faced by the management committee in traveling such a long distance.
5. What is the significance of the 1968 ‘compromise agreement’ in this dispute?
- The 1968 ‘compromise agreement’ is significant as it allowed both the Krishna Janmasthan Temple and the Shahi Eidgah Mosque to operate simultaneously. However, its validity has come into question, leading to various legal actions and disputes.
