Supreme Court Justice Manoj Misra recuses from hearing case between ISKCON Mumbai and ISKCON Bengaluru

Justice Manoj Misra of the Supreme Court recently recused himself from hearing a batch of review petitions filed by International Society of Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) Mumbai seeking reconsideration of the top court’s May 2025 ruling that recognised ISKCON Bangalore as an independent legal entity and owner of the Hare Krishna Temple in Bengaluru [ISKCON Mumbai vs. ISKCON Bangalore & Ors.]..A three-judge bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh, Satish Chandra Sharma, and PK Mishra was earlier hearing the case. The Bench was then reconstituted with Justice Manoj Misra replacing Justice PK Mishra. On October 5, the Court informed that Justice Manoj Misra is recusing from the case citing personal reasons and Justice Sharma is also due to retire in November. Hence, the three-judge bench will have to be reconstituted once again. "The Registry is directed to place the papers of the present matters before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for reconstitution of a Bench, as one of us, (Hon’ble Manoj Misra, J.) would like to recuse himself from hearing this matter." the Court noted in its order. .The May 16 verdict of the top court had ruled that ISKCON Bangalore is a distinct legal entity registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, and not a branch of ISKCON Mumbai.The Court then had upheld the trial court’s finding recognising ISKCON Bangalore’s independent status and ownership of the Hare Krishna Temple in Bengaluru, while setting aside the Karnataka High Court’s 2011 decision that had favoured ISKCON Mumbai.Aggrieved by this decision, ISKCON Mumbai approached the Supreme Court again, seeking review of the May 16 judgement that went against it.A bench of Justices JK Maheshwari and AG Masih on November 8, 2025 delivered a split verdict while considering the review petitions.While Justice Masih dismissed the review petitions, Justice Maheshwari allowed them.This difference in opinion led the matter to be placed before the Chief Justice of India who then constituted the three-judge bench which is slated to be modified for the second time now. .During an earlier hearing, the counsel appearing for ISKCON Mumbai had told the Court that there were several judicial admissions that were not taken into consideration by the May 16 judgement. It was contended that ISKCON Mumbai was in fact the parent society and that ISKCON Bangalore was merely its subsidiary and hence cannot claim ownership of the disputed temple. "We will hear it both on merit and scope of review," the bench had then said after taking note of the submissions. .[Read Order]