Karnataka High Court again rejects plea of Naresh Shenoy to participate in Venkataramana temple
Shenoy is key accused in RTI activist Vinayaka Baliga's murder case
Mangaluru: The Karnataka High Court rejected the application filed by Naresh Shenoy, one of the accused in the Vinayaka Baliga murder case, to participate in the activities and transactions of Sri Venkataramana temple on Car Street.
Key accused in the RTI activist Vinayaka Baliga murder case, business tycoon Naresh Shenoy was barred from participating activities and transactions of Sri Venkataramana temple and Kashi Mutt, by Karnataka High Court while granting conditional bail to Shenoy on September 15, 2016.
A similar plea was also rejected by the same court in October 2016, but had cleared that Shenoy will be allowed to pray in the temple as a devotee, but cannot involve himself in the administrative activities and transactions of the temple, until the case proceedings is completed.
“It is clear that there is no prohibition on him by the order under question from offering prayer as a devotee in the temple and mutt. He is only conditioned from keeping himself away from the activities and affairs of the committees attached to the temple” Justice Rathnakala had observed while rejecting his petition in October 2016.
“Unless the verdict is out in the case Shenoy should keep himself away from all activities and transactions of the temple. He should also restraint himself from participating in the transactions and activities of all committees attached to the temple” the HC maintained on Saturday.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Shahi Idgah row: Deity was not party in 'compromise' between two sides in 1968, Hindu side tells HC
Prayagraj (PTI): The Hindu side in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute submitted in Allahabad High Court Wednesday that the deity was not a party in the claimed compromise between the two sides in 1968 or in the court decree passed in 1974.
The counsel for the Hindu side also said that the claimed compromise was made by Sri Krishna Janmasthan Seva Sansthan, which was not empowered to enter into any such pact.
The object of the Sansthan was only to manage day-to-day activities of the temple and had no right to enter into such compromise, the Hindu side argued.
The submissions were made during the hearing of the suit seeking "removal" of the Shahi Idgah mosque adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple in Mathura.
The matter is being heard by Justice Mayank Kumar Jain on a plea moved by the Muslim side regarding the maintainability of the suit.
Arguments from the Hindu side will continue on Thursday.
During the earlier hearing, advocate Taslima Aziz Ahmadi, appearing for the Muslim side, had submitted before the court that the suit is barred by limitation.
As per Ahmadi, the parties had entered into a compromise on October 12, 1968. She had said the compromise has been confirmed in a civil suit decided in 1974.
The limitation to challenge a compromise is three years but the suit has been filed in 2020 and thus the present suit is barred by limitation, she had argued.
During the hearing on Tuesday, the Hindu side said the provisions of Waqf Act will not apply as the property in dispute is not a waqf property.
It said the suit is maintainable and its non-maintainability can only be decided after the leading evidence.
