The long-running clash between two powerful ISKCON factions over the Hare Krishna Temple in Bengaluru drew sharp and unusually candid remarks from the Supreme Court, which appeared visibly weary of the spiritual body&rsquo;s continuing courtroom battle.
Hearing the latest round of petitions between ISKCON Mumbai and ISKCON Bengaluru, a three-judge bench openly questioned the need for repeated confrontations over a temple dedicated to Lord Krishna. In a moment that mixed irony with concern, the bench wondered aloud, &ldquo;What Lord Krishna might be thinking about all this.&rdquo;
At the heart of the dispute is the question of who truly controls the famed Hare Krishna Temple in Bengaluru. Earlier this year, the apex court ruled that ISKCON Bengaluru functions as a separate and independent organisation and holds the rights to the temple. That ruling overturned an older decision which had favoured ISKCON Mumbai.
Unhappy with the outcome, ISKCON Mumbai returned to court, insisting crucial facts were overlooked. During the latest hearing, its representatives again claimed that the Bengaluru unit was created under Mumbai&rsquo;s umbrella and could not claim ownership independently.
The case took another twist last month when two judges hearing the matter reached opposite conclusions, forcing the Chief Justice to set up a larger bench to re-examine the dispute. That development brought the issue back under the Supreme Court&rsquo;s spotlight.
During the December 3 hearing, the Mumbai side argued strongly that its role as the original parent body had been ignored. The bench agreed to hear arguments afresh but made it clear that it would first examine whether the matter even deserved to be reopened.
The Bengaluru side sought to shift focus to its charitable work, highlighting its massive food programme. &ldquo;There have been attempts at mediation, we have made offers. The Bangalore society has started the Akshay Patra scheme. Two billion meals are being served,&rdquo; its counsel said.
This prompted a sharp response from Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, representing ISKCON Mumbai, who said, &ldquo;They have taken something that belongs to us.&rdquo;
The bench responded with a telling observation that seemed to capture the essence of the dispute. &ldquo;Obviously both sides think nothing belongs to them (but to Lord Krishna),&rdquo; it remarked, as the hearing came to an end.
For now, the court has issued notices to all parties and scheduled the next hearing for January, strictly to ensure everyone is formally notified. No immediate relief was granted to either side.
As the spiritual organisation remains locked in conflict, the court&rsquo;s words echoed beyond the courtroom, raising a bigger question about faith, ownership, and whether devotion is being overshadowed by an earthly struggle for control.

SC on ISKCON feud: What would Krishna think?

Top court reacts sharply as Mumbai and Bengaluru ISKCON units clash over temple control

SC on ISKCON feud: What would Krishna think?

Top court reacts sharply as Mumbai and Bengaluru ISKCON units clash over temple control

December 6, 2025 | 12:48 IST