Krishna Janmabhoomi row: Allahabad HC allows appointment of advocate commissioner for survey in Mathura

The Allahabad High Court on Thursday allowed a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah premises adjoining the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple, an important milestone in the temple-mosque dispute in Mathura.

The court agreed to the appointment of an advocate commissioner to oversee the survey of the mosque, which the petitioners claim holds signs suggesting that it was a Hindu temple once.

Justice Mayank Kumar Jain said the modalities of the survey will be discussed at the next hearing on December 18.


The order on the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah issue is the second temple-mosque dispute in which the high court has given its nod to a survey over the past months.

The Archeological Survey of India (ASI) recently completed a survey of the Gyanvapi mosque next to Varanasi's Kashi Vishwanath temple, but has sought more time from a local court to submit its report.

According to advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, the application submitted to the high court in the Mathura case said a lotus-shaped pillar characteristic of Hindu temples exists on the mosque premises, and an image of Hindu deity 'Sheshnag' is also present there.

It was also submitted that Hindu religious symbols and engravings are visible at the base of the pillar.

In May, the high court transferred to itself all cases related to the Mathura dispute.

On November 16, Justice Jain had reserved the order on the Hindu side's petition seeking a survey of the Shahi Idgah premises.

The petition was filed on behalf of the deity Bhagwan Sri Krishna Virajman and seven others through advocates Hari Shankar Jain, Vishnu Shankar Jain, Prabhash Pandey and Devki Nandan.

It claimed that Lord Krishna's birthplace lies beneath the mosque.

The applicants had sought the appointment of a commission with specific directions to submit its report within a stipulated time period after conducting a survey.

The petition also sought directions to photograph and record the entire proceedings on video.

According to the petitioners, the factual aspects of the "disputed structure" have to be brought before the court for proper adjudication.

(With inputs from PTI)