The Supreme Court of India has concluded hearings and reserved its verdict in the long-running legal dispute between the Svetambara and Digambara sects over the management and ownership rights of the historic Atishaya Kshetra Shri Mahavir Ji Jain Temple located in Karauli district, Rajasthan. A bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice K. Vinod Chandran wrapped up the proceedings and granted both parties a period of 8 days to submit their final written arguments before the court.
Supreme Court Bench Expresses Concern Over Prolonged Sectarian Conflict
During the proceedings, the division bench made emotional and stern observations regarding the ongoing friction between the two Jain sects. Justices J.B. Pardiwala and K. Vinod Chandran questioned whether continuous litigation in the name of Lord Mahavira, who preached peace and harmony to the world, could ever be deemed appropriate. The bench orally remarked whether the parties genuinely believe that endless court battles bring satisfaction to the deity. The judges also raised practical concerns regarding daily rituals, asking if it was feasible or harmonious to expect the Svetambara community to conduct prayers according to their traditions in the morning, followed by the Digambara community changing the deity's vestments to perform their own rituals in the evening. Emphasizing that religion and faith are highly sensitive subjects, the bench suggested that both sides should put an end to the litigation.
Legal Arguments Centered on the Places of Worship Act 1991
The core legal battle before the top court revolved around the application and scope of the Places of Worship Act, 1991. Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram appeared on behalf of the petitioner Svetambara interest, while Senior Advocate Shyam Divan represented the respondent Digambara side.
- Arguments by the Digambara Side: Senior Advocate Shyam Divan argued that the matter does not pertain to the conversion of a place of worship, but is strictly limited to temple administration and management rights. Consequently, he asserted that the Places of Worship Act, 1991 does not apply to this case and that the dispute should be determined purely on the basis of documentary and historical evidence.
- Arguments by the Svetambara Side: Senior Advocate Aryama Sundaram contended that the trial court had previously abated the proceedings under Section 4 of the 1991 Act. He submitted that since the 1991 Act contains no statutory provision for filing an appeal against such abatement, the High Court erred in entertaining the appeal. He further highlighted that historically, control over the temple, deity, and associated properties had remained with the Digambara management.
Historical Timeline of the Dispute: From 1959 Trust Act to Supreme Court SLP
The legal dispute concerning the management of the Karauli temple traces back several decades. It originated from an application filed under Section 40 of the Rajasthan Public Trusts Act, 1959, which sought the removal of the president and secretary of the Digambara committee to form a new management committee including Svetambara representatives.
- 1970 Administrative Order: The Sub-Divisional Officer (SDO) allowed an application filed against the existing Digambara management committee.
- 1994 Trial Court Ruling: The trial court abated the legal proceedings pursuant to Section 4 of the Places of Worship Act, 1991.
- Rajasthan High Court Judgment: The Rajasthan High Court ruled that an order passed under the Public Trusts Act qualifies as a 'decree', making a statutory appeal legally maintainable.
- Supreme Court Challenge: The Digambara committee challenged the High Court decision before the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition (SLP), on which the judgment now stands reserved.
