New Delhi: The Varanasi district court on Monday, May 23, reserved its order on a limited portion of the Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath temple case.
The bench of district and sessions judge Ajay Kumar Vishwesha was dealing with the specific matter of whether the court should first hear the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) Order 7 Rule 11 application filed by the mosque’s caretaker committee; or take the survey report into account and invite any objections to it.
In the application, the mosque committee had asked for the suit to be declared void in light of the 1991 Places of Worship Act. The Act has it that the character of a place of worship as it was at the time of India’s Independence cannot be altered by courts.
Reserving the order after hearing arguments from both parties, the court said it will pass its order on Tuesday, according to Live Law.
The case was transferred from the trial court in Varanasi to the district court after the Supreme Court on May 20 observed that the complexities and sensitivity of the case merit it being heard by a “senior and experienced judicial officer”.
Present hearing
In previous hearings, the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid committee, which looks after Gyanvapi mosque, had sought for the entire matter to be dismissed under the Places of Worship Act, citing the court’s powers under CPC Order 7 Rule 11.
During Monday’s hearing, the plaintiffs argued before the district court that the Order 7 Rule 11 application should not be heard in isolation and that it should be considered along with the findings of the survey commissioners report – which includes photos and video footage of the mosque premises.
The Masjid committee, on the other hand, argued that the Order 7 Rule 11 application should be heard first and insisted that it should be heard in isolation.
Thereafter, judge Vishwesha decided that the order will be passed tomorrow.
Also read: Stretching the Law to Suit the Illegal
Case background
In 2021, five Hindu women petitioners had moved the Varanasi trial court seeking year-round access to the Gyanvapi mosque complex to pray to any visible or invisible Hindu deities located within.
In April, the bench of civil judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar had ordered for an inspection and videographic survey of the mosque complex to be conducted and had appointed one Ajay Kumar Mishra as the advocate commissioner in charge of the exercise.
The Masjid committee had objected to videography inside the religious site and had moved the Allahabad high court challenging the trial court’s order. However, this application was dismissed.
Thereafter, the mosque committee filed another application before the trial court seeking the removal of Mishra as advocate commissioner, alleging bias in favour of the petitioners on his part. The court, however, refused to remove Mishra; but it did appoint two additional advocate commissioners and ordered for the survey to be conducted.
Also read: Understanding the Gyanvapi Mosque Case: What Does the Places of Worship Act Say?
The survey was then set underway and on May 16, the counsel for the petitioners told the court that a ‘shivling’ had been discovered in the mosque complex. Judge Diwakar subsequently ordered that the place where the ‘shivling’ was found be sealed and access to the mosque be restricted.
The next day, however, the Supreme Court was hearing a special leave petition (SLP) filed by the Masjid committee. Then, it ordered that the ‘shivling’ be protected but also that the access of Muslim devotees to the mosque and their ability to engage in prayers and any other religious observances remain completely unaffected.
Meanwhile, details of the findings of the survey report, including the alleged discovery of a ‘shivling’, were leaked to the media by the videographer of the survey. It was ascertained that advocate commissioner Ajay Kumar Mishra had hired the videographer and as such, he was removed from the case.
On the next date of hearing, the Supreme Court had ordered that the case be transferred to the Varanasi district court.
