- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Allahabad High Court
- /
- Contempt Petition Filed In...
Contempt Petition Filed In Allahabad High Court Against Change In Darshan Timings Of Sri Banke Bihari Temple At Vrindavan
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
9 Oct 2025 10:38 AM IST
A contempt petition has been filed in the Allahabad High Court against the change in darshan timings of Sri Banke Bihari Temple in Vrindavan.Advocate Gaurav Goswami, petitioner, approached the High Court against the decision dated 11.09.2025 of the High Powered Committee- changing the timings. It has been pleaded that the committee had overreached its mandate, as set by the Court. Supreme...
A contempt petition has been filed in the Allahabad High Court against the change in darshan timings of Sri Banke Bihari Temple in Vrindavan.
Advocate Gaurav Goswami, petitioner, approached the High Court against the decision dated 11.09.2025 of the High Powered Committee- changing the timings. It has been pleaded that the committee had overreached its mandate, as set by the Court.
Supreme Court had constituted a High-Powered Committee led by Justice Ashok Kumar, former Allahabad High Court Judge, to oversee and supervise the day-to-day functioning of the Bankey Bihari Ji Maharaj Temple at Vrindavan, Mathura in Uttar Pradesh.
Petitioner has pleaded that the decision to change timings was a violation of the order of the High Court in PIL (Civil) 1509 of 2022 (Anant Sharma & Anr. v. State of U.P. and others) wherein order of the Civil Judge increasing the timings of the darshan had been stayed and no final decision has been passed. Despite this order, it has been pleaded that the District Magistrate and the Senior Superintendent of Police have been forcing the shebaits to increase the darshan timings.
It has been pleaded that despite the undertaking by the State to not interfere in the puja archana, the timings have been changed.
Petitioner pleaded that the decision to change timings and live stream the darshan was published in newspaper and circulated in WhatsApp group. It was pleaded that petitioner had sent a legal notice to the committee, which had not been replied to till date.