Slide
Slide

Lok Adalat held for Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi–Shahi Idgah Mosque Dispute in Mathura

Shri-Krishna-Janmabhoomi-temple-ANI-upl.jpg

ANI photo

Our Bureau

Mathura

A special Lok Adalat convened in Mathura on Saturday to explore an amicable resolution to the long-running Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi–Shahi Idgah mosque dispute ended without a settlement after representatives of the Muslim side did not attend the conciliation proceedings. During the hearing, Hindu plaintiffs proposed relocating the Shahi Idgah Mosque to an alternative site if the opposing side agreed to relinquish its claim over the disputed land.

The mediation session was organised under the Supreme Court’s Samadhan Samaroh-2026 initiative and conducted in accordance with directions issued by the Uttar Pradesh State Legal Services Authority. The proceedings were presided over by Additional District and Sessions Judge Surendra Prasad at the District Legal Services Authority in Mathura.

Advocate Mahendra Pratap Singh, one of the Hindu litigants, said the plaintiffs argued that modern engineering techniques make it possible to relocate large structures safely. He added that the Hindu side expressed willingness to consider providing land elsewhere for the construction of a mosque if the disputed structure was removed and the Muslim side withdrew its claims over the site, which Hindus believe to be the birthplace of Lord Krishna.

Officials said the Lok Adalat was intended to encourage dialogue and assess the possibility of a mutually acceptable settlement before a special Lok Adalat at the Supreme Court scheduled for August 21–23. District Legal Services Authority Secretary Anita Singh urged parties to resolve the matter through consensus wherever possible.

The Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi–Shahi Idgah mosque dispute has been the subject of multiple legal proceedings over ownership and religious claims concerning the land in Mathura. With no agreement reached during Saturday’s mediation, the matter is expected to proceed through the judicial process, with further hearings likely before the Supreme Court later this year.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

scroll to top