Varanasi court’s order on Gyanvapi pleas likely today
NEW DELHI: A court in Varanasi will decide on Tuesday whether it will hear first an application by Muslim parties seeking the dismissal of petitions asking for worshipping rights inside the Gyanvapi Masjid complex or pleas by Hindu petitioners to take up the findings of a controversial survey of the complex.
The decision is likely to be crucial in the landmark case because it will indicate if the court will take up the 1991 Places of Worship Act, which forms the crux of the argument by the Muslim parties. If the court decides to hear the Hindu side’s plea first, it will indicate that the controversial survey findings — which have already hinted at the presence of Hindu relics — will take centrestage.
District and sessions judge AK Vishvesha heard arguments from Hindu petitioners, who are demanding the right to worship idols of deities they say are installed behind the western wall of the mosque, and the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, which manages the 17th-century mosque, on Monday before reserving judgment.
The case was shifted from the civil court, which had ordered the survey in April, to the district court last week by the Supreme Court.
“After hearing arguments of both sides, the court will on Tuesday give its verdict on which petition is to be heard first,” said Madan Mohan Yadav, a lawyer for the Hindu side.
The survey was completed on May 16. Hours later, Hindu petitioners claimed that a “Shivling” was found on the premises, prompting the civil court to order protection. Leaked details of the survey report, which was submitted to the court later said signs of Hindu relics and motifs were found inside the premises.
On Monday, the Hindu petitioners demanded that they be given a copy of the survey report. But the mosque committee argued that the district judge should first consider the application filed under Order 7 Rule 11 (seeking dismissal of the suit on ground of its maintainability) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
“We urged the court that Order 7 and Rule 11 application be heard separately. The Supreme Court has also said so in its last order,” said Rais Ahmad Ansari, one of the advocates of the mosque management committee.
ON FRIDAY, THE SC TRANSFERRED THE CASE TO THE DISTRICT JUDGE FROM THE CIVIL JUDGE, CITING ‘COMPLEXITIES AND SENSITIVITIES’