Krishna Janmabhoomi Case | Mathura Administration Makes Security Arrangements Amid Concern Over 'Kar Seva', Allahabad High Court Informed

A Bench of Justice Avnish Saxena was informed about the arrangements after perusing a sealed-cover report submitted by the District Magistrate and Senior Superintendent of Police, Mathura.

In its order passed on August 25, the Court recorded that, pursuant to its previous order, the report of the DM and SSP, Mathura had been received in sealed cover.

The Court stated that it had gone through the report and found that the administration had made arrangements "pertaining to the alleged Kar Seva and for keeping security at the premises".

The Court, however, noted that the report was classified and therefore directed that it be again kept in sealed cover.

It may be noted that the report had been sought by the High Court on July 17 after an application was moved by a plaintiff-in-person seeking directions to the State Government and administration to restrain any person or group from entering the disputed property for the purpose of holding any meeting, performing 'Kar Seva' or organising any function, where the object was to disturb public peace.

The application has been moved by Ashutosh Maharaj, who claims to be the President of Sri Krishna Janmbhumi Mukti Nirman Trust (Registered), Mathura, through Advocate Reena N. Singh.

The application was taken on record and objections were invited. The Court had then directed the District Magistrate and SSP, Mathura to submit a report in sealed cover before the next date.

The original application had referred to publicity through social media and other means regarding programmes allegedly proposed to be organised at the disputed site.

It raised concerns over the possible impact of such activities on the judicial proceedings, law and order and social harmony. Hence, it sought appropriate directions to the State and administration.

Background

The Allahabad High Court is presently dealing with 18 civil suits concerning the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah title dispute in Mathura.

The suits raise various claims concerning the disputed property, including prayers relating to the removal of the Shahi Idgah structure, possession of the premises and other reliefs concerning the alleged birthplace of Lord Krishna.

In these cases, a common prayer has been made seeking the removal of the Shahi Idgah mosque from the 13.37-acre complex that it shares with the Katra Keshav Dev temple in Mathura. Additional prayers include seeking possession of the Shahi Idgah premises and demolishing the present structure.

The controversy is related to the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb-era Shahi Eidgah mosque at Mathura, which is alleged to have been built after demolishing a temple at the birthplace of Lord Krishna.

In 1968, a 'compromise agreement' was brokered between the Shri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, which is the temple management authority, and the Trust Shahi Masjid Eidgah, allowing both places of worship to operate simultaneously.

However, the validity of this agreement has now been challenged in the fresh suits by parties seeking various forms of relief in courts with respect to Krishna Janmabhoomi.

The litigants' contention is that the compromise agreement was made fraudulently and is invalid in law. Claiming the right to worship at the disputed site, many of them have sought the removal of the Shahi Eidgah mosque.

In May 2023, the Allahabad High Court transferred to itself all suits pending before the Mathura Court that prayed for various reliefs pertaining to the dispute.

This transfer order was challenged in the Supreme Court by the mosque committee, and later by the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board.

In December 2023, the High Court allowed a plea seeking the appointment of a court commissioner to inspect the Shahi Idgah Mosque. In January, 2024, the Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the order. Subsequently, this stay was extended.

On August 12, 2026, the Supreme Court orally indicated that it will remand the matter to the Allahabad High Court because the notice was not issued to all plaintiffs before deciding who represents the devotees of Lord Krishna.

The Supreme Court is hearing the appeal filed by plaintiffs in suit no. 1 (filed seeking the removal of the mosque from the contested site) challenging the Allahabad High Court's decision allowing the plaintiffs in suit no 17 to be treated as representatives of all devotees of Lord Krishna.

Ashutosh Pandey alias Ashutosh Brahmachari appeared (through video conferencing).

Advocates Vinay Sharma, Gaurav Kumar, Ashvanee Kumar Srivastava, appeared for the plaintiffs no. 3 to 5

Advocates Bipin Kumar Jaiswal, Sandeep Kumar Agrahari and Reena N. Singh (through video conferencing) appeared on behalf of the plaintiffs.

Advocates Tasneem Ahmadi and Mehmood Pracha (through video conferencing), Tanveer Ahmad Khan, Imran, Afzal Ahmad, Azim Ahmad Kazmi, Hare Ram Tripathi, appeared on behalf of defendants.