Image Source: vrindavanactnow
- The plea in the name of ‘Bhagwan SriKrishna Virjman’, by the next friend Ranjana Agnihotri was filed in a Mathura Court, for removal of Masjid Idgah, allegedly constructed on the land of Shrikrishna Janam Bhoomi. The list of Petitioners also includes six devotees for Krishna Janmabhoomi.
- The plea seeks “removal of encroachment and superstructure illegally raised by Committee of Management of alleged Trust Masjid Idgah with the consent of Sunni Central Board of Waqf …at Katra Keshav Dev city Mathura belonging to deity Shree Krishna Virajman.”
- The Petitioners have submitted, that “Under Hindu Law prevalent in India from thousands of years it is well recognized that the property once vested in the deity shall continue to be the deities property and property vested in the deity is never destroyed or lost and it can be regained and re-established whenever it is freed, found or recovered from the clutches of invaders, ultras or hoodlums.”
- In 1968, the Society Shree Krishna Janamasthan Seva Sangh entered into a compromise with the Committee of Management of Trust Masjid Idgah, conceding a substantial portion of property belonging to the deity to the latter.
Augmenting to the legality of this compromise, the Plaintiffs for Krishna Janmabhoomi have submitted that:
“That it is relevant to mention that Shree Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sangh has no proprietary or ownership right in the property of Katra Keshavdev which stood vested in the deity and the Trust.”
- Some key contention of the petitioners are the following-
“He is minor. He is a juristic person. He can sue and be sued through shebait and in his absence through next friend. It can own, acquire and possess the property. It has every right to protect its property and to recover its lost property through shebait and in absence of shebait through next friend by availing an appropriate remedy in Court of law” argued the first petitioner.
The second plaintiff stated that the place of birth of Lord Shree Krishna, have “special significance” in religious scriptures as well as under Hindu law.
They seek to guarantee that Dharshan, Pooja, rituals as per the Vedic Sanatan Dharma, faith, belief, usages, traditions and customs ensured under Art 25 of the Indian Constitution are performed at the actual birthplace of the deity. Also, the Plaintiffs have right under Article 26 of the Constitution of India to regain, hold and manage the property belonging to, owned and possessed by deity Lord Shree Krishna Virajmaan.
The Court refuses to entertain the plea, cited the bar to admit the suit under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
According to Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, Courts are barred from entertaining pleas seeking the conversion of the character of religious places as it stood on the date of Indian Independence.