Admitting plea by followers in Mathura case would lead to breakdown of judicial and social system: Court

A court in Mathura, which has dismissed a plea to remove alleged encroachment in the form of Idgah Masjid from the birthplace of Lord Krishna as not maintainable, has noted that the petition before it was filed by those who claimed to have immense faith and belief in the God.

It said, if such a request is allowed by one of the innumerable followers, it would lead to total collapse and breakdown of the judicial and social system.

The five-page copy of September 30 judgment, made available on Saturday, said that the plea cannot be entertained on the ground of having been filed by merely a follower. "Such a plea by followers of Sanathan Hindu Dharma is not permissible in the eyes of law," the court said as it also termed the plaint as not justifiable and reasonable.

In charge Civil Judge (senior division) Chhaya Sharma declared that the petitioners next friend, Ranjana Agnihotri and the devotees, including advocate Karunesh Kumar Shukla, did not have right to sue in the matter.

Such kind of plea can be filed by 'Shebait', in service of deity and managing its affairs, and not by those who claimed to be the next friend of Sri Krishna Virajman, the deity, the court said.

The petitioners, through their advocates Hari Shankar Jain and Vishnu Shankar Jain claimed army of Aurangzeb who ruled between 1658 and 1707 partly succeeded to demolish Keshav Dev temple and construction was raised as Idgah masjid. They quoted historian Jadu Nath Sarkar who wrote Keshav Dev temple was razed to the ground on 1670 and a mosque was built over there.

They sought complete control of 13.73 acres of land in Mathura with the temple complex area at Katra Keshav Dev.

The plaintiffs claimed that Shri Krishna Jamnasthan Sewa Sansthan worked against interests of deity and devotees and fraudulently entered into a compromise with the Committee of Management Trust Masjid Idgah in years 1967 and 1968 conceding a considerable portion of the property to the trust.

The court, however, said the petitioners cannot question the validity of the compromise deed as none of them were trustees of Shri Krishna Janmasthan Trust.