Supreme Court finds no error in Allahabad HC impleading Centre and ASI in Shahi Idgah mosque case
The Supreme Court on Monday found no error in the Allahabad High Court's decision to implead the Centre and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in suits filed by Hindu worshippers seeking removal of the Shahi Idgah mosque from the Mathura site they claim to be Lord Krishna's birthplace.
'One thing is clear. The amendment to the original plaint by the Hindu plaintiffs has to be allowed,' said Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna, presiding over a two-judge bench.
The bench, also comprising Justice Sanjay Kumar, was hearing an appeal by the mosque committee against the March 5, 2025, high court order allowing the Hindu side to amend its petition and to add the Centre and ASI as parties to the case. The Hindu side had sought to implead the ASI saying the mosque was under the agency and hence exempt from the application of the Places of Worship Act 1991, which requires preserving the religious character of a place of worship as it was on August 15, 1947.
On April 4, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Hindu petitioners. Hearing the plea again on Monday, the CJI said, 'This plea is absolutely wrong…The High Court should have allowed the amendment to add the parties to the suit.'
The court added that it would, however, assess whether the order was effective and also its impact on the mosque side seeking the rejection of the plaint.
The counsel for the Muslim side said there was also the issue of whether the suit by the Hindu plaintiffs was barred and whether the high court had the jurisdiction to entertain it.
To a query from the Supreme Court, the mosque committee's counsel said that it was yet to file its written statement on the amendment plea. The court directed that the written statement might be filed too.
The Hindu side had approached the Allahabad High Court seeking impleadment of the ASI and the Centre pointing to the existence of a notification under sub-section (3) of section 3 of Ancient Monuments Preservation Act (VII of 1904) published in the official gazette on December 27, 1920, declaring the property as a protected monument.
The Hindu plaintiffs contended that the property being a centrally protected monument, they had to place on record new facts for the adjudication of the case.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Time of India
23 minutes ago
- Time of India
16 arrested in Assam over alleged illegal cattle slaughter during Eid
Guwahati: A total of 16 people were arrested for "illegally" slaughtering cattle during Eid a day ago, said chief minister Himanta Biswa Sarma on Sunday. He said cattle parts were recovered from multiple locations across Assam, including near Cotton University in Guwahati Five illegal slaughter sites were found in two districts of Barak Valley — Gumrah, Silchar, and Lakhipur in Cachar district, and Badarpur and Banga in Karimganj district. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now The CM, in a post on his X handle, wrote: "While our Constitution guarantees the right to religious freedom, it equally upholds the rule of law and public order. This Eid-ul-Zuha, disturbing incidents of illegal cattle slaughter and recovery of cattle parts were reported from multiple locations across Assam." Sarma said nine arrests were made in Cachar and seven in Sribhumi district, with additional reports of cattle parts being found in Dhubri, Hojai, and Sribhumi, as well as near Cotton University in Guwahati. The CM said the state govt is committed to "preserving communal harmony, but not at the cost of lawlessness or cruelty". "Please be clear that strict action will be taken against all violators — irrespective of faith or background," he added Meanwhile, people from the Hindu community blocked roads in Hojai on Sunday, alleging that pieces of meat were deliberately thrown by miscreants in certain areas on Saturday night, a police officer said. While beef consumption is not illegal in the state, the Assam Cattle Preservation Act, 2021, prohibits cattle slaughter and beef sales in majority-Hindu, Jain, or Sikh localities, as well as within a five-km radius of a temple or satra (Vaishnavite monastery). On Sunday, a large number of people from the Hindu and Muslim communities came out in Hojai to hold protests separately. They blocked roads and clashed with the police, the officer said. Tired of too many ads? go ad free now "While the Hindus blocked roads in the Barpukhuri area, where suspected cattle meat pieces were found at three places on Saturday, Muslims also came out and blocked a road at Bhuyanpatty as a countermeasure," he said. A section of the mob at Bhuyanpatty clashed with the police, prompting officers to use "mild lathi-charge" to disperse the protesters. However, the situation was brought under control with additional security forces deployed in the area. In Guwahati, police said some pieces of meat wrapped in a polythene packet were found near the Cotton University. The sample has been sent for forensic testing. "No comment can be made until reports are available," the police said.
Hindustan Times
2 hours ago
- Hindustan Times
Democracy without dissent a contradiction: Justice Surya Kant
Democracy without dissent is a contradiction and that silence in the face of injustice is not neutrality, but complicity, Supreme Court judge justice Surya Kant has asserted as he invoked India's constitutional ethos and the top court's role in defending civil liberties. Justice Kant, who is in line to take over as the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in November this year, was speaking at the Washington Supreme Court as part of an international judicial exchange. In his address earlier this week that underscored the shared constitutional commitments of India and the United States, the judge said: 'Democracy without dissent is a contradiction, and that silence in the face of injustice is not neutrality, but complicity…These are not merely legal precedents; they are constitutional declarations.' Justice Kant highlighted that the right to free speech, protected under Article 19(1)(a) of the Indian Constitution and the First Amendment in the US, has been 'zealously defended' by courts on both sides of the Atlantic. Drawing parallels with the US Supreme Court's protection of student protest in Tinker Vs Des Moines (1969), he recalled how India's top court, much earlier, had established the primacy of expression in Romesh Thappar and Brij Bhushan cases in 1950, ruling against pre-censorship and vague notions of public order. 'In both countries, the judiciary has consistently pushed back against the temptation to suppress dissent under misguided and deceptive notions that the executive may hold,' he noted. Reaffirming the foundational nature of constitutional supremacy in both democracies, Justice Kant highlighted that the basic structure doctrine in India that asserts Parliament cannot amend away core constitutional values mirrors the American principle that 'even the majoritarian will must bow' before foundational ideals like liberty, federalism, and equality. 'These doctrines reflect a shared understanding that tampering with these principles would cause a rift so immense that it would threaten the very heart of our existence,' he warned. ALSO READ | Free speech, democracy, and the epidemic of hurt feelings Justice Kant also spotlighted India's global leadership in using public interest litigation (PIL) as a judicial tool to redress collective harm. Citing the Vishaka judgment (1997) where the Indian Supreme Court laid down workplace sexual harassment guidelines in the absence of legislation, he said: 'Though structurally distinct, both approaches reflect a shared judicial philosophy: that justice must not be confined to individual litigants but must be responsive to collective harm and systemic failure.' In contrast, he acknowledged the role of class action lawsuits in the US, such as Lois Jenson Vs Eveleth Taconite Co (1993), where female workers collectively challenged workplace abuse. Addressing the evolution of due process jurisprudence, Justice Kant recalled how the Indian Constitution initially adopted 'procedure established by law' over the American-style 'due process,' but eventually evolved the latter through judicial interpretation. 'In the seminal Maneka Gandhi case (1978), the Indian Supreme Court read into the phrase the requirements of justice, fairness, and reasonableness -- effectively harmonizing our doctrine with the Fourteenth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution,' he added. Justice Kant concluded his address on a note of judicial kinship, stating: 'It is my firm belief that our countries, and our legal systems, share a kindred spirit rooted in the pursuit of justice, liberty, and the rule of law… The law must be a shield for the weak, not a sword for the powerful.'
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Time of India
Vishalgad Urs not held, yet 1,300 devotees went to fort for prayers at dargah
Kolhapur: Around 1,300 devotees visited Vishalgad to offer prayers at Hazrat Peer Malik Rehan's shrine on Sunday. The traditional four-day Urs, scheduled to begin on Sunday, was cancelled following restrictions by the state archaeology department. The Bakrid qurbani proceeded according to Bombay high court guidelines. While the Urs typically draws thousands of attendees, recent campaigns by right-wing organisations against encroachments have led to reduced attendance. The previous year's event was marred by violence over encroachment issues. The animal sacrifice ritual was conducted under strict protocols, requiring enclosed private premises. The area was surrounded by metal sheets to ensure compliance. Devotees from various regions queued early to climb to the fort, presenting identification such as Aadhaar cards for registration. The administration limited visits between 9am and 5pm, prohibiting overnight stays. All 1,300 registered visitors completed their darshan/prayers within the stipulated time. Sub-divisional officer Sameer Shingate, of the Pannala division, said: "Everyone left the fort before 5pm. Police bandobast and scrutiny will remain in place for three more days." Although the dargah trust officials proposed a modest Urs celebration, authorities implemented a complete prohibition. Kolhapur's superintendent of police Yogeshkumar Gupta said the administration has challenged the HC ruling permitting animal sacrifice at the fort in the Supreme Court. Right-wing groups opposed the HC decision, demanding the prohibition of both Urs and animal sacrifice at the historic 11th-century fort. These groups celebrated the administration's decision to ban the Urs as their success. Kolhapur: Around 1,300 devotees visited Vishalgad to offer prayers at Hazrat Peer Malik Rehan's shrine on Sunday. The traditional four-day Urs, scheduled to begin on Sunday, was cancelled following restrictions by the state archaeology department. The Bakrid qurbani proceeded according to Bombay high court guidelines. While the Urs typically draws thousands of attendees, recent campaigns by right-wing organisations against encroachments have led to reduced attendance. The previous year's event was marred by violence over encroachment issues. The animal sacrifice ritual was conducted under strict protocols, requiring enclosed private premises. The area was surrounded by metal sheets to ensure compliance. Devotees from various regions queued early to climb to the fort, presenting identification such as Aadhaar cards for registration. The administration limited visits between 9am and 5pm, prohibiting overnight stays. All 1,300 registered visitors completed their darshan/prayers within the stipulated time. Sub-divisional officer Sameer Shingate, of the Pannala division, said: "Everyone left the fort before 5pm. Police bandobast and scrutiny will remain in place for three more days." Although the dargah trust officials proposed a modest Urs celebration, authorities implemented a complete prohibition. Kolhapur's superintendent of police Yogeshkumar Gupta said the administration has challenged the HC ruling permitting animal sacrifice at the fort in the Supreme Court. Right-wing groups opposed the HC decision, demanding the prohibition of both Urs and animal sacrifice at the historic 11th-century fort. These groups celebrated the administration's decision to ban the Urs as their success.
