As courts across the country continued to be drawn into long-running and newly emergent contests over faith, tradition, and property, 2025 kept religious disputes at the centre of judicial attention.
From Madurai’s lighting of the Karthigai Deepam at Thirupparankundram Hill to Ajmer Sharif, religious practice repeatedly intersected with public order and constitutional safeguards.
The Supreme Court as well as other courts across the country, remained seized of high-stakes mosque-temple disputes, including Sambhal’s Shahi Jama Masjid, the Gyanvapi complex in Varanasi, and the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah site in Mathura, with interim stays shaping the outcomes.
Here’s a look at the six significant disputes that originated from faith, practices, and figures this year.
A lamp lit at the Thiruparankundram temple as part of ‘Karthigai Deepam’ festival celebrations, in Madurai district. (File Photo)
Following a Madras High Court order on December 1, a century-old property disagreement between a Hindu temple and an adjoining dargah in Tamil Nadu’s Madurai has again exposed the political fault lines.
A dispute over where the traditional Kathigai Deepam lamp should be lit on the Thirupparankundram Hill in Madurai reached the Madras High Court in November, when the petitioner Rama Ravikumar, a devotee seeking permission to light the Karthigai Deepam at the Deepathoon- an ancient stone lamp pillar on Thirupparankundram Hill instead of its usual location, which is near the Uchi Pillaiyar temple.
On December 1, Justice G R Swaminathan allowed the plea and directed the Subramaniya Swamy Temple management to arrange for the Karthigai Deepam lamp to be lit at the ancient Deepathoon pillar on the festive day on December 3.
The Tamil Nadu government and temple authorities, however, opposed the order, citing tradition and public order concerns.
On December 3, devotees and the petitioner attempted to light the lamp at the Deepathoon pillar in compliance with the Court order.
Protests broke out by opposing groups near Thirupparankundram Hill, leading to violence, following which security was tightened and CISF was deployed. The court subsequently intiated contempt proceedings against the Tamil Nadu government and officials for failure to implement its directives.
Due to the ongoing tensions and the high court’s contempt orders, the Tamil Nadu government moved the Supreme Court challenging the high court’s directive on lighting the Deepam, and the matter is pending.
Delhi High Court restrained the Centre from demolishing structures in Ajmer Sharif Dargah in December. (File Photo)
In December, the Delhi High Court restrained the Centre from demolishing structures in the Ajmer Sharif Dargah without first providing an opportunity for a hearing to the affected persons. While passing the interim directions, Justice Sachin Datta held that the principles of natural justice should be adhered to before taking any precipitative action.
The order came on a plea filed by Syed Meharaj Miya, a Khadim (custodian) of the dargah, who had challenged the notice issued by the Ministry of Minority Affairs regarding removal of all “unauthorised, unapproved and illegal encroachments” in the dargah premises.
The court, where the matter is pending, also directed the Centre to expedite the formation of the Dargah Committee as contemplated under the Dargah Khawaja Sahib Act, 1955.
The Supreme Court passed an order in August, directing the status quo in the mosque–temple dispute and issued notice to the Hindu petitioners. (File Photo)
Trailing from 2024, the dispute over the Hindu claims on Uttar Pradesh Sambhal’s Shahi Jama Masjid as a Shri Hari Har Temple dedicated to Lord Kalki reached the courts this year.
The first plea was filed in the Supreme Court concerning the Shahi Jama Masjid dispute in Sambhal by the Committee of Management of Shahi Jama Masjid, challenging a November 19, 2024, order of the Sambhal Senior Division Civil Judge that allowed a survey of the mosque premises.
In January, the Supreme Court heard the arguments on the dispute, particularly on a well near the mosque. The court stayed execution of a municipal notice about the well and ordered a status report.
The court passed an order in August, directing the status quo in the mosque–temple dispute and issued notice to the Hindu petitioners. As of now, the court extended its status quo order in September and directed its registry to enquire into the dual appeals filed by the mosque committee.
In December, the temple management committee and a Sevayat filed a fresh petition questioning the functioning of the high-powered temple management committee. (File Photo)
The core conflict centres on who controls and manages the historic Banke Bihari Temple, traditionally run by Sevayat/Goswami priests and hereditary families, and the efforts by the Uttar Pradesh government and courts to change the administration and regulate finances for development and crowd safety.
In August, the Supreme Court set up a 14-member high-powered Temple Management Committee under former Allahabad High Court judge Justice Ashok Kumar to “oversee and supervise the day-to-day functioning inside and outside” the Banke Bihari temple in Vrindavan till the high court decides on the constitutional validity of the Uttar Pradesh Ordinance bringing the shrine management under a trust.
Subsequently, in December, the temple’s management committee and a Sevayat, Rajat Goswami, filed a fresh writ petition questioning the functioning of the high-powered temple management committee, which the court had constituted in August.
The Supreme Court extended the stay on the Allahabad High Court’s 2023 order allowing an application for the inspection of the Shahi Idgah complex. (Express Photo by Apurva Vishwanath)
The Allahabad High Court in May 2023 transferred all the pending suits to itself. The high court rejected pleas challenging the maintainability of the suits in August 2024. The mosque committee has since approached the top court challenging this order.
In January, the Supreme Court extended the stay on the Allahabad High Court’s 2023 order allowing an application for the inspection of the Shahi Idgah complex in Mathura by a court-appointed commissioner in connection with the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah Masjid dispute.
A bench of former Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and K V Viswanathan, which took up appeals filed by the mosque committee challenging the high court order, directed that the stay be continued.
As of now, there is an Interim stay on substantive actions in all courts by the Supreme Court. (File Photo)
A Varanasi district court ordered an ASI survey and upheld the maintainability of the suit filed by the devotees in 2023. In January 2024, the court directed that appropriate arrangements be made to allow worship in the basement of the Gyanvapi complex.
The maintainability of the 1991 suit was also upheld in 2022. The survey was stayed by the Supreme Court at times to allow procedural appeals.
As of now, there is an interim stay on substantive actions in all courts by the Supreme Court, which includes the Allahabad High Court and the Varanasi court order.
It all started with the 1991 suit filed on behalf of the Deity Adi Vishweshwar, claiming the mosque was built on the site of the Kashi Vishwanath temple. In 2021, five Hindu women filed a suit before a Varanasi Civil Court seeking permission to worship religious idols that were allegedly located inside the Gyanvapi mosque.