Allahabad HC seeks ASI's reply on plea alleging Bhagwan Krishna idol buried under Agra's Jama Masjid
- In Reports
- 10:53 PM, Jul 06, 2024
- Myind Staff
The Allahabad High Court on Thursday heard a petition alleging that an idol of Lord Krishna is buried beneath the stairs of Jama Masjid in Agra. The petitioner, Mahendra Kumar Singh, has requested a survey by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and an investigation by an Advocate Commissioner.
Initially, this petition was included in a group of 18 petitions to be heard by the high court together. However, the high court separated it from the collective hearing due to the distinct nature of this petition (suit number three) compared to the others.
The bench of Justice Mayank Kumar Jain noted that an application (A-5) was submitted on behalf of the plaintiffs, requesting the respondent authority to produce an S.I.T. report, conduct an archaeological survey by the competent authority, and appoint an Advocate Commissioner to oversee the S.I.T. report and the archaeological survey.
"Sri Manoj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the defendants may file reply to this application by the date fixed," the court ordered while posting the matter next on August 5, 2024.
During the hearing, the Committee of Management Shahi Masjid Idgah requested to implead in the case.
Petitioner Mahendra Pratap Singh, representing his case via video conferencing, presented historical evidence to support his claims. He asserted that in 1670, the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb demolished the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi temple and buried the gold-studded idol of Lord Krishna beneath the mosque's stairs to undermine the Hindu faith.
Singh requests the idol to be excavated and reinstalled at its original temple site in Mathura.
Singh, who heads the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Mukti Nyas, cited various historical texts, including Sakhi Mustaq Khan's "Masir-e-Alamgiri," FS Grous's "Mathura Memoir," "Mathura Gazzeteer," and "Aurangzeb Nama," to substantiate his claim that Aurangzeb buried the idol in 1670.
Image source: Lawbeat
Comments