Prayagraj. Allahabad High Court has reserved its decision after hearing all the parties on the application filed demanding appointment of Advocate Commissioner in the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Katra Keshav Dev and Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura. Besides, orders have also been given to issue notice to the parties who were not present in the hearing. This order has been given by the bench of Justice Mayank Kumar Jain while hearing the petition filed in 16 other civil suits including Lord Shri Krishna Virajman Katra Keshav Dev.
An application has been submitted by advocates Harishankar Jain, Vishnu Shankar Jain and Prabhash Pandey for appointment as Court Commissioner. It was argued that all 16 cases related to the Mathura Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute are to be heard before the bench. Before this, if the court appoints an advocate commissioner and gets the spot physically inspected, then important evidence will come to light in the hearing of the case. Below the mosque, there are many symbols related to Lord Krishna. Apart from this, many evidences related to Hindu architecture are also unearthed.
The same was done in the Gyanvapi Masjid Kashi Vishweshwar Temple controversy. There too, Advocate Commissioner has been appointed and physical investigation has been conducted. Supreme Court advocate Mahmood Pracha, appearing on behalf of the Committee of Management Mathura Shahi Eidgah, argued that nothing was done for the last 46 years. Also, the committee has challenged the High Court’s order of transfer of cases in the Supreme Court. It is scheduled to be heard on January 9, 2024.
Sunni Central Waqf Board’s advocate Puneet Kumar Gupta said that an objection has been raised on the maintainability of the civil suit under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The status of 947 cannot be changed under the Places of Worship Act. Civil suits have been banned in such cases. Waqf Act also applies to this. When the case itself is not maintainable then the justification for appointing Advocate Commissioner does not arise. Only after the maintainability of the civil suits is decided, further orders can be passed. Temple side’s advocate Mahendra Pratap Singh and many other parties also presented their arguments. The hearing lasted for a total of three hours from 10 am to 1 pm.
