Krishna Janmabhoomi Case: Petitioner welcomes Mathura Court's nod, seeks removal of Mosque

After the big win for the Hindu side in the Mathura District Court, one of the petitioners, Advocate Ranjana Agnihotri, spoke exclusively to Republic TV and broke down the details of the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Mosque dispute. Agnihotri explained that the Hindu side had moved the Mathura District Court to challenge a 2020 order, wherein a civil judge had dismissed their suit in the case on grounds that it is 'not maintainable' under the Places of Worship Act, 1991.

"On September 25, 2020, a suit was filed in the Mathura court for Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi, but the court rejected it saying that if we will accept the case, petitioners will line up and we won't be able to handle them. We challenged the order in the district court and they accepted it. We want to thank Shankar Jain for this success. Be it Kashi, or Mathura, he has guided us," said Agnihotri. 

The advocate further informed that the Hindu side's main demand was to remove the 'encroachment' (Shahi Idgah Masjid), which was built through an illegal agreement.

"They should be prevented from going there and the land should be declared Krishna Janmabhoomi. Till 1978 there was no mosque, that was our agreement. But an illegal decree was obtained in court to build that illegal structure, which we challenged," she said. 

"The agreement was done by a fake organisation, its name was similar to the original (Krishna Janmabhoomi) trust. The original trust's motive was to build a temple on that land. No one has the right to do a settlement in the name of God," the advocate added. 

Suit to remove Shahi Idgah Masjid 'maintainable': Mathura Court

On Thursday, the Mathura District Court ruled that the civil court's refusal to admit the Hindu side's suit on grounds of the Places of Worship Act, 1991, was incorrect. The revision plea was filed by Ranjana Agnihotri and others, claiming that 13.37 acres of land belonged to Hindu deity Lord Shrikrishna Virajman.

It had asserted that as devotees of Lord Krishna, the petitioners had the right to move the suit in view of their fundamental rights under Article 25 (Freedom of Religion) of the Constitution.

While hearing the case, District Judge Rajeev Bharti overturned the civil court's order and observed that the suit is 'maintainable'. "Right to sue of the plaintiff will stand restored. The case will be restored at its original number," the Court ordered.