New Delhi: Several religious leaders have sharply criticised an Allahabad High Court ruling rejecting an application by the deity, Shriji Radha Rani Vrishbhanu Kumar Vrindavani (Goddess Radha), seeking to be made a party to one of the 18 suits related to the Mathura Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah after it called scriptural evidence “hearsay”.
Religious leaders–including Uttarakhand Jyotir Math Shankaracharya, Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani Akhara Kailashanand Giri, Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhara and Swami Jitendranand Saraswati of the Sant Samiti—condemned the move, saying the scriptures cannot be dismissed as hearsay.
“The things that Allahabad HC has said that Radhaji is kaalpanik (imaginary) reflect the ignorance of the court. Maybe he is not aware how religious law functions in India,” said Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwaranand Saraswati of Uttarakhand’s Jyotir Math.
“He should at least have remembered that in 2019 itself, the Supreme Court had given a verdict on Ram-Janmabhoomi. The verdict was in favour of Ram Lalla. In this, too, Skanda Purana and other Hindu texts were the basis. Courts should not hurt the sentiments of crores of Sanatani Hindus,” he added.
In its order dated 23 May, Justice Ram Manohar Narayan Mishra said that “Pauranic illustrations’ cited by the applicant are “considered hearsay evidence” and there was no proof to support the claim that the deity was a joint holder of the 13.37 acres of land in question.
Mishra said the petitioner’s claim is based on some reference in various Purans and Sanhitas in which Shriji Radha Rani is considered the soul of Lord Krishna.
“The Pauranic illustrations are generally considered as hearsay evidence in legal context. In the case of Pauranic illustrations, these are graphic representation of story and events and truth of events, they depict, is usually based on narrative and not on direct observation or testimony,” the court said.
“There is no evidence in support of the claim raised by the applicant that the applicant is entitled as joint holder of said land of 13.37 acres and property of the applicant is also involved in suit property claimed by the plaintiff no.1 as birth place of lord Krishna,” it added.
Other religious leaders also said the court had undermined their faith.
“Shrimad Bhagwat Mahapuran and Gita both are part of the Mahabharat. We cannot in any way call them suni sunayi,” Jitendranand Saraswati, general secretary of Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti, told ThePrint.
“Thousand years ago, the Mahabharat happened, Dwarka is of Lord Krishna and Radhika ji Surya Sarovar Kurukshetra mai purnima ka snaan karne gayi thi. Every scripture of Sanatan Dharma, including Lord Ram, has been called controversial. People have called it a myth and we have seen what happened to them. If the HC has said something like this, it should reconsider its view,” he said.
The Mahamandaleshwar of Juna Akhara, Swami Yatindranand Giri, told ThePrint that in a religious dispute, such religious texts are quoted while pointing out that Puranas, Vedas and Upanishads are ‘granths’ (religious texts).
“Puranas are not ‘suni sunayi baatein’ (hearsay). They are our granths and their truth cannot be negated. The kind of things that are being said should not be told in the first place and one should be careful while making such statements as it is linked to faith,” he said.
Mahamandaleshwar of Niranjani Akhara Kailashanand Giri told the media that things written in the Puranas are not hearsay but completely authentic. He said it is on the basis of the things written in the Puranas that one believes and worships the Gods.
The Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute is a long-standing legal battle centred around claims that the mosque stands on a site, which Hindus believe was the birthplace of Lord Krishna. The mosque lies adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura.
(Edited by Sugita Katyal)