'To Ease Pilgrim Pressure': High Court Upholds Extended 'Banke Bihari' Darshan Timings, Rejects Contempt Plea Against SC-Appointed Panel

A bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal noted that the Committee, empowered by the Top Court to oversee the day-to-day affairs of the temple, had decided to increase the darshan time, in light of the huge influx of pilgrims at the Temple who are facing great hardship.

The Court noted that the Committee was acting to alleviate pressure inside and outside the Temple so that pilgrims would not be subjected to distress.

Briefly put, the instant contempt plea was filed by Gaurav Goswami, contending that once the HC had passed a restrained order staying the operation of an order passed by a Civil Court in Mathura (in November 2022), the Committee so appointed could not have increased the darshan time.

It may be noted that the Civil Court's order had attempted to increase darshan timings based on a communication between the District Magistrate and the District Judge. This order was promptly stayed by the HC.

Subsequently, the matter reached the Supreme Court, where, citing administrative deadlock and infighting that were causing distress to pilgrims, the Apex Court constituted a High-Powered Temple Management Committee on August 8, 2025.

This Committee was specifically tasked with overseeing and supervising the day-to-day operations inside and outside the Temple.

On September 11, 2025, the Committee held a meeting and adopted a resolution to extend the duration of darshan. Consequently, the District Magistrate/Collector, Mathura, who serves as the Member Secretary, issued an office memorandum on September 19, 2025, implementing the change.

Now, the applicant before the HC argued that the Committee's decision flouted the restraining order passed by the HC. It was also submitted that increasing the darshan time would alter the deity's daily routine and that an administrative body could not override a judicial stay.

The Committee, on the other hand, argued that the Supreme Court had intervened precisely because prior infighting had exacerbated the problems, leaving pilgrims without any amenities or redress.

He further submitted that the Apex Court had empowered the Committee to deal with issues incidental to proper functioning, including effective crowd control and maintenance of public order.

Against the backdrop of these submissions, the bench found no merit in the contempt plea as it noted that the context in which the HC passed the stay order in November 2022 differed from the context in which the Committee took the resolution.

The single judge noted that the Committee had taken the decision after due consideration and that it had been mandated to oversee and supervise the day-to-day functioning inside and outside the Temple.

The HC further pointed out that the Committee had increased the darshan time, taking into account the large influx of pilgrims at the Temple who are facing significant hardship.

Thus, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the HC found that the order of the HC had not been flouted or violated by the opposite parties.

Hence, the Court concluded that no case for contempt was made out as the opposite parties are the Committee constituted by the Apex Court and are overseeing and supervising the day-to-day functioning inside and outside the Temple.

With this, the contempt petition was dismissed.