Prayagraj. Reena N. on behalf of the Hindu side in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute case of Mathura. Singh argued on Tuesday that it has been the character of Waqf to encroach on any property, change its nature and declare it as one’s property without ownership. He said that this arrangement cannot be allowed.
He said that while raising preliminary objection on the maintainability of the suit, the Muslim side said that this property came in their favor under an agreement in 1968, but the owner was not a party to that agreement. He said that the owner of the property is the deity, but the deity was not made a party.
He said that the provisions of the Places of Worship Act and the Waqf Act do not apply here and this suit is maintainable. He said that a decision regarding non-sustainability of the application can be taken only after looking at the evidence. This case is being heard by the court of Justice Mayank Kumar Jain. The court directed the next hearing of this case on May 15.
Earlier, on May 2, the Hindu side had argued that the provisions of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 would not be applicable in this case as religious character is not defined in this law. He said that the religious character of a place or structure can be determined only by evidence which can be decided only by a civil court.
The lawyer for the Hindu side had also cited the decision passed in the Gyanvapi case in which the court had said that religious character can be decided only by a civil court. This suit has been filed to take possession of the land and restore the temple after the removal of the Shahi Idgah Mosque.
Tags: Gyanvapi Masjid, Gyanvapi Mosque, Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi Controversy
FIRST PUBLISHED: May 7, 2024, 21:59 IST