The Supreme Court will hear the petitions related to the management of the Banke Bihari Ji Temple in Vrindavan Tomorrow. the hearing is scheduled for the 5th of august at 10:30 AM. These petitions challenge the ordinance passed by the uttar pradesh government has been handed over to the government formed trust. the petitioners argue that the shri banke bihari temple is a private religious institutions and through this ordinance, the government is indirectly trying to take control of the temple. they believe this move interferes with the religious freedom and the temple’s traditional way of functioning. the case has raised important questioned about the role of the state in managing religious places. the supreme court is now reviewing whether the government’s action is justified and whether such a popular religious site can be called a private institution. the decision is likely to impact the management of other temples as well.
According to the recent reports, In today’s hearing senior advocate shyam divan represented the petitioners and argued that the banke bihari temple is a private religious institution. He emphasized that the temple has always been managed privately and should remain free from the government control. During the hearing, Justice surya kant raised an important point. he said that the temple’s income is not meant for just a few individuals, but should also be used for the development of the temple and related services. in response, Advocates shyam divan claimed that the state goverment is planning to use the temple’s funds to buy the land, which is not acceptable.
“Calling a Public Place Private is Confusing” Says Court
During the Hearing, he argued that this shows the government’s indirect attempt to take over the temple’s financial control. the discussion highlighted a key concern whether the temple’s income should only be used by its current managers or for larger development plans. the court is yet to decide the balance between the traditions and the public interest. The court said that it does not appear the state is trying to take over the temple’s money, instead the funds are being used for the temple’s development. advocate shyam divan responded, saying the government is trying to take control of their funds and that the temple is a private one. to this, the court replied sharply, questioning how a religious place visited by lakhs of devotees could be called as private. the bench said, management may be private, but how can a deity be private? Calling the deity or such a public place a private thing can be really misleading.
