Gyanvapi case: Varanasi court rejects plea seeking permission to worship alleged ‘shivling’ inside mosque

On June 8, 2022, Varanasi District Court rejected the plea filed by Swami Avimukteshwaran and seeking permission to offer prayers at the structure found inside the Gyanvapi Mosque complex which was claimed to be a ` `Shivling’ according to the court-ordered investigation report.

An urgent hearing has been requested on the said application filed on June 4 asking that the right to worship, bath, make-up and raga-bhog of the alleged Shivling be given immediately, the Hindustan Times reported.

After hearing the case, District Judge Ajay Krishna Vishwesha dismissed the request saying, “The request presented by the applicant does not appear to be of an urgent nature. The applicant’s request for permission to present the costume during the summer holidays is rejected. »

Swami Avimukteshwaranand began fasting until death last week after he was denied permission to offer prayers to the alleged Shivling who was allegedly found inside the Gyanvapi compound, Indian Express reported. .

Meanwhile, Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind proposed to the SC to become a party to the PIL challenging the constitutional validity of provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991 which froze the religious character of structures such as they were at the time. of independence, report TOI.

The Gyanvapi Mosque lawsuit was originally filed in August 2021 by a few Hindu women in the Civil Court (Main Division), demanding that the Maa Shringar Gauri Temple located within the Gyanvapi Mosque premises be reopened and people be allowed to dine. offering prayers in front of the idols that are still kept there. The petitioners cite the right to practice one’s faith and religious freedom guaranteed by Article 25 of the Constitution.

Following this, a video survey of the area was ordered and the survey was carried out despite objections raised by the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid (AIM), which is the managing authority of the mosque. AIM is the defendant in the case. After the High Court in Allahabad rejected their appeal against the investigation, AIM moved SC where it highlighted how the Places of Worship Act 1991 prohibits changing the character of a place of worship from as it was on August 15, 1947. Thus, AIM declared the suit not maintainable pursuant to CPC Order 7, Rule 11(d).

The SC then transferred the case from the court of Civil Judge (Main Division) Ravi Kumar Diwakar, who originally ordered the investigation, to the court of a more senior district judge to decide on the maintainability of the prosecution, in accordance with Ordinance 7, Rule 11. .

On Monday, May 30, the court adjourned hearings until July 4. Meanwhile three other parties – Lord Vishweshara (through his next friend) Hindu Sena, Brahmin Sabha and Nirmohi Akhara have also approached the court to seek third party claim in the action as plaintiffs.