SC may remand Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah 'lead suit' issue to Allahabad HC
New Delhi, August 12
The Supreme Court on Wednesday indicated that it may remit to the Allahabad High Court the question of which among the several lawsuits concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute should be treated as the representative or lead case.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva observed that the High Court had proceeded to designate one Hindu party as representing all devotees of Lord Krishna without issuing notices to the plaintiffs in the other suits.
"The application was for something else, and notices were not issued to all the plaintiffs," the bench observed, indicating that it was inclined to send the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration.
The matter has been posted for further hearing on September 2.
The apex court was hearing a challenge by a Hindu plaintiff to a 2025 order of the Allahabad High Court, under which another Hindu party involved in a separate suit was treated as a representative of all devotees of Lord Krishna in the litigation concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura.
The Allahabad High Court had, on July 18, 2025, allowed an application filed by a plaintiff by permitting that suit to be treated as a representative action on behalf of the parties involved in the other suits. The High Court had directed that the suit would consequently be heard and decided first.
The order was challenged before the Supreme Court by another Hindu party, which contended that although its suit had effectively become the lead matter after the various civil suits were transferred from the Mathura Court to the High Court, the High Court had wrongly conferred representative status on a different plaintiff.
The broader litigation involves more than 20 civil suits concerning the Shahi Idgah mosque complex in Mathura. The Hindu plaintiffs claim that the mosque was constructed by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb after the demolition of a temple at the birthplace of Lord Krishna.
The suits were initially instituted before the Mathura court but were subsequently transferred to the Allahabad High Court. The High Court is seized of multiple proceedings concerning the dispute, including questions relating to surveys and the maintainability of the suits.
The Supreme Court is also hearing several challenges filed by both the mosque committee and Hindu parties against different orders passed during the litigation. These include a challenge to the Allahabad High Court's May 26, 2023 decision transferring all matters relating to the dispute from the Mathura court to itself.
On January 16, 2024, the top court, on a plea by the mosque committee, had put a stay on the operation of the December 14, 2023, order of the Allahabad High Court that allowed a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex, adjacent to the Krishna-Janmabhoomi temple, in Mathura.
The High Court had allowed the survey of the complex and agreed to the appointment of a court commissioner to oversee it.
The disputed site holds significant religious importance for Hindus, as the Hindu litigants claimed the premises hold signs suggesting that a temple once existed at the site.
— ANI
Reader Comments
This is a matter of faith for millions of Hindus. The birthplace of Lord Krishna is not something to be taken lightly. I hope the courts expedite the process and deliver justice. The evidence of a temple existing before is clear - we just need a fair hearing.
As someone following Indian legal cases from abroad, this seems like a sensible move by the Supreme Court. Procedural correctness is key in such sensitive matters. Sending it back for fresh consideration with proper notices will strengthen the eventual decision.
The legal process must be followed correctly, but I also hope this doesn't get delayed endlessly. More than 20 lawsuits, multiple surveys, and years of litigation - the common devotee just wants a resolution. Both sides deserve a timely and fair judgment.
It's important to respect the judicial process here. The SC is right to ensure all parties are properly heard before designating a lead case. This sets a good precedent for how complex religious property disputes should be handled.
This is a sensitive matter that could impact communal harmony. I appreciate that the courts are being cautious. Rather than rushing to judgment, they're ensuring every party has their say. That's how you build trust in the judicial system.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.