Delhi High Court Rejects Petition For Naga Sadhu Temple Land Demarcation, Citing Contradiction With Ascetic Beliefs

In a recent ruling, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition filed by Avinash Giri, successor of Mahant Shri Naga Baba Bhola Giri, which sought the demarcation of property in the name of a Naga Sadhu’s temple. The court noted that Naga Sadhus are traditionally known to live lives devoid of worldly pleasures, and claiming property rights contradicts their beliefs and practices. This observation was made while dismissing the plea for land demarcation for the temple situated at Ghat No. 33, Triveni Ghat, Nigambodh Ghat, Yamuna Bazaar, which had been under the petitioner’s possession since 1996.

The High Court stated that permitting the construction of temples or samadhisthals (memorial sites) on public land by various religious figures could have detrimental effects on public interest. Justice Sharma emphasized that allowing such practices could lead to vested interest groups exploiting public land, endangering the larger public interest.

The plea also mentioned that the temple was under threat of demolition following the actions taken by officials from the Flood Control and Irrigation Department of the Delhi government on February 22, 2023. They had demolished several slums and other structures in the vicinity. However, the court ruled that the petitioner was a “class trespasser” and that the land in question was intended for the broader public interest, specifically for the revival of the Yamuna River.

Also read: Major Bust Uncovers Police Involvement In Illegal Liquor Smuggling

Justice Sharma pointed out that the petitioner had constructed two rooms with tin sheds and other amenities, along with a shrine dedicated to Naga Baba Bhola Giri, who passed away in 1996. The court noted that there was no evidence to suggest the site had historical significance or was meant for public worship. Additionally, records indicated there were only 32 historical ghats in the area, contradicting the petitioner’s claim about Ghat No. 33.

Concluding the case, the court found no evidence supporting the shrine’s historical importance or its dedication to the general public, thereby dismissing the petition.