Karnataka HC allows state govt to decide on use of Idgah Maidan

A division bench of the Karnataka high court has modified its August 24 order and given the green signal to the state government to decide on the use of the disputed Chamarajpet Idgah Maidan for religious and cultural events. This order was passed on the basis of an appeal filed by the state against an earlier HC order and comes in the backdrop of right-wing groups demanding the use of the disputed Idgah Maidan for Ganesh festivities this year.

In its appeal, the Karnataka government had told the HC on Friday (August 26) that the deputy commissioner for Bengaluru had received five applications for use of the Idgah Maidan land on August 31 (Ganesh Chathurthi) for a limited period “for the purpose of holding religious and cultural activities.” The state had sought a modification of the HC order of August 24 denying permission and asking it to maintain status quo.

After the recent HC order, a meeting has been convened between Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai, state advocate general Prabhuling K Navadgi and revenue minister R Ashoka on Saturday (August 27) to discuss the court verdict and take the necessary follow-up action.

The government is willing to initiate orders on conducting the Ganesha Festival at Idgah Maidan.

Also Read: Idgah Maidan case: HC orders status quo; ‘land should be used as playground’

Karnataka High Court Order

On Thursday (August 25), a high court single bench in an interim order, asked the state government and Karnataka State Board of AUQAF to maintain the status quo on the controversial Chamarajpet Idgah Maidan in Bengaluru.

An order delivered by Justice Hemant Chandanagoudar said the ground should only be used as a playground, a prayer ground by Muslims for offering prayer twice a year during Ramadan and Bakrid, till further court orders deciding on the conflict.

However,  on Friday (August 26), the divisional bench consisting of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty modified the single bench order, gave power to the state to decide on allowing religious or cultural events, at the disputed maidan based on the appeal filed by the state.

The state informed the division bench that the Bengaluru deputy commissioner had received five applications for using the Chamarajpet Idgah Maidan to hold religious (Ganesha festival) and cultural activities for only a limited time period on Wednesday (August 31). The state sought a modification of the single bench order of the Karnataka high court, for it to take action on the applications.

Also Read: Tricolour hoisted at controversial Idgah Maidan, Bengaluru; dispute over land continues

The HC division bench, comprising acting Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice S Vishwajith Shetty, observed that the Indian society comprises religious, linguistic, regional or sectional diversities.The Indian Constitution has also encouraged brotherhood amongst the various sections of society. The principle of religious toleration is the characteristic of Indian civilisation, they observed.

The High Court bench thus decided to modify the interim order and permit the state government to consider and pass appropriate orders on applications received by the DC, seeking use of the land in question for holding religious and cultural activities for a limited period from August 31 onwards.

Decision today

Stating that the interim orders of the Karnataka high court will be implemented in letter and spirit, Chief Minister Basavaraj Bommai said a meeting has been convened to discuss the court verdict and take necessary action.

Also Read: Corruption rampant in Govt offices: Karnataka HC

He said that a meeting with the state advocate general and revenue minister will be held on Saturday (August 26) to take a suitable decision in this regard. The government will try to maintain peace in the society, the CM added.

Commenting on how several organisations, including Nagarikara Okkuta, want to celebrate Ganeshotsava in Idgah Maidan, the CM said the government will take a suitable decision after studying the court’s interim order in detail.