On August 4, 2025, during a hearing on the Shri Banke Bihari Temple case, the Supreme Court remarked that “Lord Krishna himself was the first mediator,” referring to the divine role in resolving disputes. This statement blended religious wisdom with modern legal reasoning, adding a spiritual dimension to an ongoing legal battle.
- In May 2025, the Uttar Pradesh government approved the Banke Bihari Temple corridor project, allocating around ₹500 crore from temple funds to purchase five acres of land.
- The project’s primary aim is to manage massive crowds at the temple, especially after a tragic stampede-like incident during Janmashtami celebrations in 2022 that killed two devotees.
- The temple, located in Vrindavan, is one of India’s most visited pilgrimage sites, drawing lakhs of devotees annually. The government argued that the corridor would improve safety, accessibility, and crowd management.
Supreme Court’s Remark
During the hearing, a bench led by Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and other judges observed that history and tradition offer valuable guidance in resolving disputes. They cited the Mahabharata episode where Lord Krishna tried to mediate peace between the Pandavas and the Kauravas before the Kurukshetra war.
By calling Krishna the “first mediator,” the court highlighted that dialogue, reconciliation, and fairness are time-tested principles that remain relevant in modern conflicts, including religious property disputes.
Legal Perspective
- The bench also questioned the Uttar Pradesh government’s role in intervening in what is essentially a private matter of temple management. Justice BV Nagarathna noted that the state appeared to be overstepping by inserting itself into internal temple affairs.
- The court pointed out that key stakeholders — the temple management and sevayats (priests) — were not made formal parties in some of the state’s decisions, raising concerns about transparency and due process.
- The Supreme Court stressed that governance over a religious institution must be balanced with constitutional principles and stakeholder participation.
Social and Administrative Impact
- The temple management committee and the Goswami community have strongly opposed the project and the 2025 ordinance that placed the temple under a form of state oversight. They argue that it undermines traditional religious administration and was enacted without proper consultation.
- In response to protests, the UP government initiated dialogue sessions. Chief Minister’s adviser Awanish Kumar Awasthi met with Goswamis, local shopkeepers, and residents, assuring them that all opinions would be considered before any final implementation.
- Mathura MP and actress Hema Malini publicly supported the corridor project, stating it would benefit everyone, including the Goswami community, and improve safety for pilgrims. She acknowledged opposition but maintained that the project’s long-term benefits outweighed concerns.
“First Mediator” as a Universal Lesson
The Supreme Court’s reference to Lord Krishna was not just symbolic. It underscored the idea that law alone cannot resolve every conflict — moral, cultural, and historical perspectives also play an important role.
Krishna’s attempt to prevent war in the Mahabharata is seen as a model for peaceful resolution: seeking common ground before resorting to confrontation. By invoking this image, the court encouraged parties to prioritize dialogue and mutual understanding over litigation and hostility.
Broader Context
- The case has sparked a wider debate about government control over temples and religious institutions in India.
- The court has previously asked petitioners to provide data on how many temples across the country are under government control.
- For many, the “Krishna as mediator” comment serves as a reminder that legal disputes involving faith must be handled with both judicial rigor and cultural sensitivity.
Vinfast India Plant Launches, EV Market Badalne को तैयार