The Supreme Court said on the cases related to Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah land dispute, the proceedings will continue before the Allahabad High Court. The Supreme Court said, it would not be appropriate to interfere in the order of the High Court without hearing the arguments of both the parties.
On Friday, the top court was hearing a petition challenging a High Court order. Following the order, the High Court had transferred to itself all the cases related to the dispute pending before the lower court of Mathura.
Refusing to stay the Allahabad High Court proceedings, the Supreme Court said, "Without hearing both the parties, it would not be appropriate to interfere with the order of the High Court. Last time, we did not stay it. Now, you say "There's more to be said. That doesn't mean we have to stop there."
The petition filed by the Committee of Management Trust Shahi Masjid Idgah was heard in a bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. The bench also includes Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah. The counsel appearing for the petitioner urged the Supreme Court to stay the proceedings before the Allahabad High Court. The committee has challenged the May 26 order of the High Court.
The top court said that a total of 18 petitions are pending before the High Court in this case. The petitioner's counsel said that he did not have the financial means to go to Allahabad to fight the case. The distance from Mathura to Allahabad is more than 600 km.
The lawyer said it would be convenient for them to hear the cases in Delhi, as it takes two to three hours to reach the national capital from Mathura. The bench said that it is very difficult to accept this argument as the Delhi court is already overburdened. Justice Kaul said, "Personally, I cannot show no confidence in the Allahabad High Court."
The Supreme Court said, "It is not acceptable to us that you can come to Delhi but cannot go to Allahabad." The bench said it will have to hear the case and examine the order passed by the High Court. The bench said, "We have to hear why should we take it as a trial? Let it be like any other ordinary case."
The bench said the matter has to be heard and asked both the parties to file their brief submissions not exceeding three pages long. The court posted the case for hearing on January 9.