A civil suit was filed in the court of the civil judge, higher division, Mathura, on behalf of the child deity Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman, seeking the removal of Shahi Idgah, adjacent to the Shri Krishna temple complex in Mathura.
A Ranjana Agnihotri, a resident of Lucknow in Uttar Pradesh, has filed the lawsuit.
The UP Sunni Central Waqf Board and the Shahi Idgah Trust Management Committee have been indicted as defendants in the lawsuit.
The lawsuit seeks the reclamation of 13.37 acres of land located within the temple area.
The lawsuit claims that the trust, with the help of some Muslims, invaded the land belonging to Shri Krishna Janamasthan Trust and the deity, and erected a structure.
Also read: Lakshagriha of Prayagraj, said to be a site from the Mahabharat era, to get a research center
Lord Krishna’s birthplace is under the structure erected by the trust, the lawsuit says.
It was also claimed that Shri Krishna Janamsthan Seva Sansthan, who is the governing body of the temple complex, entered into an illegal pledge with the Shahi Idgah trust in order to seize the property in question.
“The Shree Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan is working against the interests of the deity and the devotees and fraudulently entered into a compromise with the Management Committee of the Masjid Idgah Trust (Trust) in 1968 by granting a considerable part of the property belonging to the deity and the trust. “Said the suit.
The civil judge, Mathura, ruled on the lawsuit in relation to the alleged “engagement between Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan and the Trust” on July 20, 1973.
The current lawsuit has now prayed to “cancel this trial.”
However, what may act as a legal obstacle to this new lawsuit would be the law passed in 1991: Places of Worship (Special Provisions Act). This law was passed at the height of the Ram Janmabhoomi dispute and seeks to protect all religious structures as they existed at the time of Independence, with the exception of the disputed site at Ayodhya.
Therefore, the conversion of mosques into temples or vice versa is prohibited by law. Since Ayodhya land was exempt, the Supreme Court had invoked this law by awarding the disputed site in Ayodhya to the child deity Ram Lalla, while reaffirming that similar cases cannot be considered with respect to other sites.
.
