Latest news with #Pauranic
The Print
29-05-2025
- Politics
- The Print
Religious leaders call HC ‘ignorant' for calling Puranic texts ‘hearsay' in Krishna Janmabhoomi case
'The things that Allahabad HC has said that Radhaji is kaalpanik (imaginary) reflect the ignorance of the court. Maybe he is not aware how religious law functions in India,' said Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati of Uttarakhand's Jyotir Math. Religious leaders–including Uttarakhand Jyotir Math Shankaracharya, Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani Akhara Kailashanand Giri, Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhara and Swami Jitendranand Saraswati of the Sant Samiti—condemned the move, saying the scriptures cannot be dismissed as hearsay. New Delhi: Several religious leaders have sharply criticised an Allahabad High Court ruling rejecting an application by the deity, Shriji Radha Rani Vrishbhanu Kumar Vrindavani (Goddess Radha), seeking to be made a party to one of the 18 suits related to the Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah after it called scriptural evidence 'hearsay'. 'He should at least have remembered that in 2019 itself, the Supreme Court had given a verdict on Ram-Janmabhoomi. The verdict was in favour of Ram Lalla. In this, too, Skanda Purana and other Hindu texts were the basis. Courts should not hurt the sentiments of crores of Sanatani Hindus,' he added. In its order dated 23 May, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra said that 'Pauranic illustrations' cited by the applicant are 'considered hearsay evidence' and there was no proof to support the claim that the deity was a joint holder of the 13.37 acres of land in question. Mishra said the petitioner's claim is based on some reference in various Purans and Sanhitas in which Shriji Radha Rani is considered the soul of Lord Krishna. 'The Pauranic illustrations are generally considered as hearsay evidence in legal context. In the case of Pauranic illustrations, these are graphic representation of story and events and truth of events, they depict, is usually based on narrative and not on direct observation or testimony,' the court said. 'There is no evidence in support of the claim raised by the applicant that the applicant is entitled as joint holder of said land of 13.37 acres and property of the applicant is also involved in suit property claimed by the plaintiff no.1 as birth place of lord Krishna,' it added. Other religious leaders also said the court had undermined their faith. 'Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapuran and Gita both are part of the Mahabharat. We cannot in any way call them suni sunayi,' Jitendranand Saraswati, general secretary of Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti, told ThePrint. 'Thousand years ago, the Mahabharat happened, Dwarka is of Lord Krishna and Radhika ji Surya Sarovar Kurukshetra mai purnima ka snaan karne gayi thi. Every scripture of Sanatan Dharma, including Lord Ram, has been called controversial. People have called it a myth and we have seen what happened to them. If the HC has said something like this, it should reconsider its view,' he said. The Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhara, Swami Yatindranand Giri, told ThePrint that in a religious dispute, such religious texts are quoted while pointing out that Puranas, Vedas and Upanishads are 'granths' (religious texts). 'Puranas are not 'suni sunayi baatein' (hearsay). They are our granths and their truth cannot be negated. The kind of things that are being said should not be told in the first place and one should be careful while making such statements as it is linked to faith,' he said. Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani Akhara Kailashanand Giri told the media that things written in the Puranas are not hearsay but completely authentic. He said it is on the basis of the things written in the Puranas that one believes and worships the Gods. The Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute is a long-standing legal battle centred around claims that the mosque stands on a site, which Hindus believe was the birthplace of Lord Krishna. The mosque lies adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura. (Edited by Sugita Katyal) Also Read: No option but to be powerful in face of evil forces at our borders—RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat in Organiser
The Hindu
29-05-2025
- Politics
- The Hindu
Hindu religious leaders condemn Allahabad HC remark that Puranas written on hearsay
Key religious leaders, including Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath and Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani Akhara, have condemned the recent judgment of the Allahabad High Court in which it had declined to make Radha a party in the disputed Krishna Janabhoomi structure in Mathura stating that 'Puranas' were written on hearsay. In its order dated May 23, a bench of Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra, while hearing a petition that pleaded to make Hindu goddess Radha a joint holder of the disputed Krishna Janambhoomi property, said that the reference given by the petitioner is based on something written in the Puranas and Samhitas wherein Shriji Radha Rani is considered as soul of Lord Krishna. 'The Pauranic illustrations are generally considered as hearsay evidence in legal context. In the case of Pauranic illustrations, these are graphic representations of stories and events and the truth of events they depict is usually based on narrative and not on direct observation or testimony. There is no evidence in support of the claim raised by the applicant that the applicant is entitled as a joint holder of said land of 13.37 acres, and the property of the applicant is also involved in suit property claimed by the plaintiff No. 1 as the birthplace of Lord Krishna,' the court said. 'Ignorance' Reacting to the court's remarks, Avi Mukteshwaranand Saraswati, Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, said that the remarks made by the judge shows his ignorance on the religion. 'The judge must remember the Ram Janambhoomi case in which the Supreme Court has accepted the statements written in Skanda Puran and other religious texts of the Hindu religion and gave the property to Ram Lalla,' said the Shankaracharya in a video message. He added that the legal system in India, as per the past orders of the Supreme Court, has to accept the Hindu religious texts when the matter is related to Hindu rights and structures. 'Puranas are scientific' Speaking to the media, Kailashanand Giri, Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani, also criticised the HC's remarks and said that Puranas are completely authenticated and scientific. 'The judge has the full right to decide based on his discretion, but he also has the responsibility to maintain the trust of the people. He said that we believe in God only on the basis of what is written in the Puranas. He said that we believe in God only on the basis of what is written in the Puranas. We see the form of Lord Ram and Krishna through it,' he added. Jitendranand Saraswati, general secretary of Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti, said that every scripture of Sanatan Dharma including the character of Lord Ram has been termed as 'myth' by the people in the past but they were proven wrong. 'Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapuran and Gita both are part of the Mahabharat. We cannot say that they were written on hearsay. The HC has said something like this it should reconsider its view,' he added. Slamming the High Court, the Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhara, Swami Yatindranand Giri said that in a religious dispute, such religious texts are quoted while pointing out that 'Puranas', 'Vedas' and 'Upanishad' are the 'granths'. He also said that courts must think twice before hurting the religious sentiments of people.
Time of India
27-05-2025
- General
- Time of India
Allahabad High Court rejects plea seeking Radha Rani's inclusion as party in Mathura case
The Allahabad High Court has rejected an application impleading goddess Radha to be made a party to one of the 18 suits pertaining to the Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah title dispute. Rejecting the application, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra said, "Puranic illustrations are considered hearsay evidence." The court said, "The claim of the applicant as a joint holder of property in dispute together with plaintiff is based on some reference in various Purans and Sanhitas wherein Shriji Radha Rani is considered as the soul of lord Krishna ." In the hearing held on May 23, it said that the Pauranic illustrations, and what they depict, "is usually based on narrative and not on direct observation or testimony." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Play War Thunder now for free War Thunder Play Now Undo The application, moved through Advocate Reena N Singh claimed that the applicant - Shriji Radha Rani - is the legal wife and the feminine form of the plaintiff in suit - Sri Bhagwan Krishna Lala Virajman - and that together, they both are worshipped as deities since time immemorial. They both allegedly hold the disputed land comprising 13.37 acres, it argued. Live Events The applicant claimed joint ownership of the disputed property with the plaintiff, based on references in Purans and Sanhitas. It was argued that the applicant (Radha Rani) is a necessary and proper party to the suit and her impleadment is essential for complete justice under Order one Rule 10 of Civil Procedure Code. The court, all the same, rejected the application, saying the applicant is neither a necessary nor proper party to the suit. The court noted that the applicant could not demonstrate any evidence or binding authority in support of her claim in the disputed matter, which is claimed by the plaintiffs as the birthplace of Lord Krishna and where the Shahi Idgah Masjid currently stands. The court, however, noted that if the applicant in the future comes with any concrete evidence supporting the claim of joint ownership, her impleadment may be considered. The plaintiffs claim that Sri Krishna's birthplace, a temple in Mathura, has been under encroachment since 1669-70 by the Shahi Idgah Masjid management. The suit seeks removal of the allegedly illegal encroachment. The court concluded, "This court finds force in the objection raised by some of the parties to the suit in regard to the impleadment application filed on behalf of Shriji Radha Rani. There is no averment in the impleadment application that there was a temple of Radha Rani in the property in dispute." The controversy is related to the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb-era Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura, which is alleged to have been built after demolishing a temple at Lord Krishna's birthplace.
Time of India
27-05-2025
- General
- Time of India
Allahabad HC rejects plea seeking Radha Rani's inclusion as party in Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah case
Allahabad HC (File photo) NEW DELHI: The Allahabad High Court has rejected an application seeking to make goddess Radha a party to one of the 18 suits related to the Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah title dispute. Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra dismissed the application on May 23, stating that Puranic illustrations cannot be considered as direct evidence in legal proceedings. The application was filed through Advocate Reena N Singh, claiming that Shriji Radha Rani is the legal wife and feminine form of the plaintiff, Sri Bhagwan Krishna Lala Virajman. The petitioner argued that both deities jointly hold the disputed land of 13.37 acres. "Puranic illustrations are considered hearsay evidence," the court stated while rejecting the application. "The claim of the applicant as a joint holder of property in dispute together with plaintiff is based on some reference in various Purans and Sanhitas wherein Shriji Radha Rani is considered as the soul of lord Krishna," the court observed. The court noted that Pauranic illustrations and their depictions "is usually based on narrative and not on direct observation or testimony." by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like เทรด CFDs ด้วยเทคโนโลยีเทรดสุดล้ำ และ รวดเร็วกว่า IC Markets สมัคร Undo The applicant sought to be included as a necessary party to the suit under order one rule 10 of civil procedure code, claiming joint ownership based on references in Purans and Sanhitas. The court found that the applicant failed to provide any concrete evidence or binding authority to support the claim in the disputed matter, which is claimed as Lord Krishna's birthplace where the Shahi Idgah Masjid currently stands. "This court finds force in the objection raised by some of the parties to the suit in regard to impleadment application filed on behalf of Shriji Radha Rani. There is no averment in the impleadment application that there was a temple of Radha Rani in the property in dispute," the court concluded. The court left room for future consideration if the applicant presents concrete evidence supporting the claim of joint ownership. The plaintiffs in the main case claim that Sri Krishna's birthplace temple in Mathura has been under encroachment since 1669-70 by the Shahi Idgah Masjid management. They seek removal of the alleged illegal encroachment. The dispute centers around the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura, allegedly built during Mughal emperor Aurangzeb's era after demolishing a temple at Lord Krishna's birthplace.
Hindustan Times
26-05-2025
- Hindustan Times
Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah case: HC rejects plea to make goddess Radha a party
: The Allahabad high court has rejected an application moved by the Hindu side seeking impleadment of the deity -- Shriji Radha Rani Vrishbhanu Kumari Vrindavani (goddess Radha) -- as a party to one of the 18 suits pertaining to the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah title dispute case in Mathura. Rejecting the application, the court said, 'Puranic illustrations are considered hearsay evidence.' 'The claim of the applicant as a joint holder of property in dispute together with plaintiff is based on some reference in various Puranas and Sanhitas wherein Shriji Radha Rani is considered as soul of lord Krishna. The Pauranic illustrations are generally considered as hearsay evidence in legal context.' 'There is no evidence in support of the claim raised by the applicant that the applicant is entitled as joint holder of said land of 13.37 acres and property of the applicant is also involved in suit property claimed by the plaintiff as birthplace of lord Krishna,' said Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra in his order dated May 23. The application, moved through advocate Reena N Singh, claimed that the applicant – the deity Shriji Radha Rani -- is the legal wife and the feminine form of the plaintiff in the suit -- Sri Bhagwan Krishna Lala Virajman -- and that together, they both are worshipped as deities since time immemorial. They both allegedly hold the disputed land comprising 13.37 acres, according to the application. The applicant claimed joint ownership of the disputed property with the plaintiff Bhagwan Krishna Lala Virajman, based on references in various Purans and Sanhitas describing Shriji Radha Rani as the soul of Lord Krishna. It was argued that the applicant is a necessary and proper party to the suit and her impleadment is essential for complete justice under order one rule ten of the civil procedure code (CPC). However, the court rejected the application, observing that the applicant is neither a necessary nor proper party to the suit and that it is not expedient to implead her in suit number seven. The court, however, noted that if the applicant in the future comes with any concrete evidence supporting the claim of joint ownership, her impleadment may be considered at an appropriate stage. The suit seeks removal of the alleged illegal encroachment from the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi temple premises, now known as Shahi Idgah Masjid (formerly Jama Masjid). The court ultimately concluded, 'This court finds force in the objection raised by some of the parties to the suit in regard to impleadment application filed on behalf of Shriji Radha Rani. There is no averment in the impleadment application that there was a temple of Radha Rani in the property in dispute,' the court stated while fixing July 4 as the next date of hearing. The controversy concerns the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb-era Shahi Idgah mosque at Mathura, which is alleged to have been built after demolishing a temple at Lord Krishna's birthplace. In May 2023, the Allahabad high court transferred all such suits from the Mathura court to itself.
