Allahabad High Court Dismisses Contempt Plea Against SC-Appointed Temple Committee
The Allahabad High Court has dismissed a contempt application filed against the Supreme Court-appointed high-powered temple management committee. The committee, led by retired Justice Ashok Kumar, had extended the darshan timings at the Thakur Shri Banke Bihariji Maharaj temple in Vrindavan-Mathura.
Background of the Legal Dispute
The contempt petition was filed by Gaurav Goswami, who contended that the committee's decision violated the High Court's November 2022 order. This order had stayed a Mathura civil court's attempt to increase darshan timings based on communication between the district magistrate and district judge.
Subsequently, the matter reached the Supreme Court, which cited administrative deadlock and infighting causing distress to pilgrims. On August 8, 2025, the apex court constituted a high-powered temple management committee specifically tasked with overseeing day-to-day operations inside and outside the temple.
Committee's Decision and Implementation
On September 11, 2025, the committee held a meeting and adopted a resolution to extend the duration of darshan. Consequently, the Mathura District Magistrate/Collector, who serves as the member secretary, issued an office memorandum on September 19, 2025, implementing the change.
In the contempt petition, Goswami submitted that the committee's decision flouted the High Court's restraining order. He argued that increasing darshan time would alter the deity's daily routine and that an administrative body could not override a judicial stay.
Court's Reasoning and Decision
Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal, presiding over the case, noted that the committee was empowered by the Supreme Court to oversee the temple's day-to-day affairs. The committee had decided to increase darshan time in light of the huge influx of pilgrims at the Banke Bihari temple, who were facing great hardship.
The court observed that the committee was acting to alleviate pressure inside and outside the temple so that pilgrims would not be subjected to distress. The committee submitted that the Supreme Court had intervened precisely because prior infighting had exacerbated problems, leaving pilgrims without amenities or redress.
Furthermore, the committee argued that the Supreme Court had empowered it to deal with issues incidental to proper functioning, including effective crowd control and maintenance of public order.
Key Findings and Conclusion
The court found no merit in the contempt plea, noting that the context in which the High Court passed the stay order in November 2022 differed from the context in which the committee took the resolution. The single judge emphasized that the committee had taken the decision after due consideration and had been mandated to oversee temple functioning.
The High Court further pointed out that the committee had increased darshan time, taking into account the large influx of pilgrims facing significant hardship. Thus, considering all facts and circumstances, the court found that the High Court's order had not been flouted or violated.
Hence, the High Court concluded that no case for contempt was made out. With this observation, the court dismissed the contempt petition in its decision dated January 22.
