Mathura court adjourns hearing on revision petition over Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute

Mathura (Uttar Pradesh) [India], September 13 : A Mathura court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing on a revision petition related to the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute to October 3 this year.
Speaking to ANI before the hearing, Advocate Mahendra Pratap Singh representing the Hindu side said that they have urged the court to send a court commissioner to the Idgah complex and conduct a survey by the Archaeological Survey of India.
"We have urged the court that it is essential to send a court commissioner there and do a survey by the ASI. The survey was done earlier also in 1852 to 1863 in which Hindu symbols were found," Singh said.
"We have said that the Court commissioner should go inside the Shahi Idgah complex, videography and photography should be done. The facts should come to the fore before the court," he added.
The advocate claimed that the Hindu side has all the symbolic and documentary evidences in their favour.
"All the evidences are in favour of the Hindu side, be it symbolic or documents. We have produced everything before the court. The people in the Shahi Idgah have encroached on the land illegally," he said.
Singh alleged that Mughal emperor Aurangzeb had demolished the Krishna temple in the complex and built a Masjid.
"It is our clear stand that it is a temple and it should be. A huge temple should be constructed there. Where there is Shahi Idgah, that is the sanctum sanctorum of the god in reality. Aurangzeb had demolished the temple in 1670 and built the Masjid," he alleged.
Talking about the case, the advocate said that the case was filed on December 2020, and neither the Places of Worship Act 1991 nor the Monuments Act 1958 apply to the case.
"The matter of Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi pertains to 13.37-acre land. We have said since the beginning that the land belongs to the Hindu side and Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust. The land should be given to the Hindus. We have filed a case in this regard on December 23, 2020. The most important thing is that there was a compromise made in 1968 which we have challenged," he said.
"The Muslim side refers to Places of Worship Act 1991. But I want to make it clear that the Act doesn't apply here. It is mentioned in Section 4A that if any litigation is in continuation, the Act will not be applicable. The Monuments Act 1958 will not be applicable to the properties older than 100 years. We have referred to both the acts inside the court," Singh said explaining the case.