Mathura District Court Admits Appeal of Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi Case

The District Judge’s court admitted the petition to remove the mosque from Mathura’s Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi. The next hearing, in this case, will be held on 18 November.  Earlier the Suit filed before Civil Judge, was dismissed. Read Here

The appeal was filed in the court of District Judge Mathura Sadhni Rani Thakur on October 12.

Shri Krishna Virajaman is demanding ownership of 13.37 acres of land of Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi. Along with this, the petition has also demanded the removal of Idgah Mosque. 

The court has also sent notices to Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, Idgah Trust, Sunni Central Waqf Board, Shahi Masjid Idgah in this context.

This is the whole case

Eight people, including Sri Krishna’s, Advocate Ranjana Agnihotri, had filed a claim in the court of Civil Judge Senior Division Chhaya Sharma to remove the Shahi Mosque Idgah from Sri Krishna’s birthplace. 

It is claimed that today where there is a mosque,  there was a prison of Kansa and  a temple of Krishna. The Mughals broke it down and built the royal Idgah Mosque there.

A suit was filed in the Civil Judge Court of Mathura regarding the case, but the petition was dismissed from there, after which an appeal has been filed in the District Judge’s Court.

In 1968 there was an agreement for a two and a half rupee stamp

After running the case for nearly 136 years, in 1968, Sri Krishna Janmasthana Seva Sansthan itself signed an agreement with the Muslim side on a stamp paper of two and a half rupees. 

Under the agreement, the two sides handed over some of their land to each other. Now the place where the mosque is, is being named after the birthplace trust.

Many devotees, including Raji Rajaraman, a litigant, demanded that the agreement reached on October 12, 1968 and the decree on July 20, 1973 be quashed. The petition sought ownership of Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi on 13.37 acres of land, including Idgah. 

It has also been said that Shri Krishna Janmasthana Seva Sansthan does not have the right to make this agreement. The petition, filed by advocate Vishnu Jain and Harishankar Jain in the court of senior civil judge Chhaya Sharma, is 57 pages. 

Law Trendhttps://lawtrend.in/
Legal News Website Providing Latest Judgments of Supreme Court and High Court

Related Articles

Latest Articles