Krishna Janmabhoomi case: Muslim side moves Supreme Court after Hindu side claims Shahi Idgah is ASI monument

The Shahi Idgah - Krishna Janmabhoomi dispute took another interesting turn on Friday after the Supreme Court decided that it will examine the new claim raised by Hindu parties that the disputed structure is a protected monument under the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) and cannot be used a mosque [Committee of Management Trust Shahi Idgah vs Bhagwan Shrikrishna Virajman Next Friend and ors]..A Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice PV Sanjay Kumar issued notice to the Hindu parties on the appeal filed by Muslim side against an order of the Allahabad High Court which had allowed the Hindu's side plea to amend their suit and also make ASI a party to the case."As far as the question whether the ASI protected place can be used as a mosque is pending before us. We had stated that no effective interim order be passed and you never told this to the High Court. This will have to be dealt with in other matter on merits," the Supreme Court said today when the appeal filed by Muslim side came up for hearing.The Bench also observed that the order by the High Court allowing the Hindu side's amendment application seemed to be prima facie correct.The Hindu side's application before the High Court was based on the claim that an ASI-protected place cannot be used for worship as a mosque and the Places of Worship Act will not apply to such a structure. "You have the right to amend plaint and implead parties. No parties retrospective or not is a separate issue. They can also amend the plea and raise the issue in replication that places of worship act will not apply. That is why impugned order appears to be correct. It's not a new case. He is entitled to challenge it when you raise a new defense," the Court remarked.The Court eventually said that it will hear the case along with other related matters in the dispute on April 8..The Hindu side initially approached the High Court with an application to make ASI a party to the case. They also sought amendment to the plaint filed by them initially.They claimed that the mosque was declared as a protected monument by a 1920 notification issued by the Lieutenant Governor of the United Province. The notification was issued under Section 3 of the Ancient Monument Preservation Act.Consequently, the Places of Worship Act, 1991 will not be attracted in the present case and the place cannot be used as a mosque, they argued.The Places of Worship Act seeks to protect the status of all religious structures as it stood on the date of independence (August 1947) by barring courts from entertaining cases which raise dispute over the character of such places of worship.The law, which was introduced during the height of Ram Janmabhoomi movement, seeks to protect the status of all religious structures as it stood on the date of independence by barring courts from entertaining cases which raises dispute over the character of such places of worship.The Muslim side opposed the amendment plea by Hindu parties. They claimed that it was an attempt to negate the defence taken by the Muslim side based on the Places of Worship Act."The proposed amendments shows that the Plaintiffs are attempting to negate the defence taken by the Defendant that the Suit is barred by the Places of Worship Act 1991 by setting up a new case. The Plaintiffs are amending their Plaint, to try and wriggle out of the defence taken by the defendant that the suit is barred under the Places of Worship Act, 1991," the Muslim side argued.However, the High Court on March 5 allowed the Hindu side's application and permitted them to amend their plea and also add ASI as a party to the case."Let amendment be incorporated in the plaint within a month. The defendant may file addition written statement within two weeks of incorporation of proposed amendment by plaintiffs," the High Court said in its order. .This led to the appeal before the top court..The dispute itself arose after the Hindu side (plaintiffs) filed a suit before the civil court claiming that the Shahi Idgah Masjid (mosque) was built over Krishna Janmabhoomi land.The civil suit was filed on behalf of a Hindu deity Bhagwan Shri Krishna Virajman and certain Hindu devotees. The plaintiffs sought the removal of the mosque from its current site.The plaintiffs further claimed that there were various indications to support the view that the Shahi-Idgah Mosque is, in fact, a Hindu temple. Therefore, an application was made before the High Court to appoint a commissioner to examine the site.The main suit was initially been dismissed by a civil court in September 2020, citing the bar on admitting the case under the Places of Worship Act, 1991. However, this decision was overturned after an appeal before the Mathura District Court.The Mathura District Court in May 2022 held that the suit was maintainable. The matter was later transferred to the High Court in 2023.An appeal by the Muslim side before the apex court has challenged the Allahabad High Court order that allowed the plea moved by Hindu side seeking consolidation of the suits and transfer of the same from civil court to the High Court.The Supreme Court is also seized of an appeal against the recent verdict of the Allahabad Court that deemed 18 suits relating to the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute maintainable..Meanwhile, the top court had in December last year directed courts across the country to not pass any effective orders or surveys against existing religious structures in suits filed disputing the religious character of such structures.The Court said that the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991 expressly prohibits institution of such suits and the same cannot proceed until the validity of the 1991 law itself is decided.This order was passed in a separate case challenging the validity of the 1991 Act itself. Subsequently, no effective orders were being passed by courts in such disputes including the Shahi Idgah case.