The Varanasi court will hear the Anjuman Intezamia Committee’s arguments on October 11, following which the court will issue a ruling. Speaking to media representatives on behalf of the Hindu side in the Gyanvapi case, Advocate Vishnu Jain said: “Whether or not the building located within Gyanvapi Masjid is part of this suit property was one of the two questions the court wanted us to address. Second, may a commission for scientific research be established by the court? We’ve sent in our response.”
Additionally, according to advocate Jain, the Muslim side has asked for some time to respond. On October 11, the subject will now be heard.
The order was given by the bench of Varanasi District Judge Ajay Krishna Vishwesh.
“We claimed that it is a component of the property at issue in our lawsuit and that the Court may order a scientific study in accordance with Order 26 Rule 10A of the CPC. The Muslim side is waiting for a response. On October 11, the subject will now be heard “he added.
After hearing arguments from both parties earlier on September 29, the court reserved the decision in the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri dispute.
A “Shivling,” according to the Hindu side, was allegedly discovered during the court-ordered videography investigation of the mosque grounds in the area next to the “wazukhana.” The discovered building, according to the Muslim side, was a “fountain,” however.
On September 22, the Hindu side made a request for a carbon date of the artefact they claimed to be the “Shivling.”
The age of an archaeological artefact or finding may be determined scientifically using carbon dating.
Two other cases that were scheduled for hearing on Thursday but were postponed due to the holiday will also be heard today. First, a lawsuit was brought by Shankaracharya Swami Avimukteshwarananda over the court’s request for the worship of the Shivling at Gyanvapi.
The second is related to the desire that Gyanvapi’s “Shivling” location be turned over to Hindus. Senior Civil Judge Kumudlata Tripathi’s bench will hold a hearing on both cases today.
The Hindu side had earlier on September 29 asked that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) conduct a scientific inquiry into the “Shivling” and conduct a carbon dating on the “Argha” and the vicinity.
Earlier, an appeal against the Allahabad High Court’s decision to reject a PIL that asked for the creation of a committee or commission headed by a judge to investigate the nature of the structure uncovered in the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi had been filed before the Supreme Court.
In their request, seven worshippers urged the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to determine the type of building on the Gyanvapi site.
The Allahabad High Court On July 19, rejected their request for the creation of a committee or commission to investigate the structure uncovered in the Gyanvapi Mosque. The committee or commission would have been led by a serving or retired judge of the High Court or Supreme Court.
The PIL brought before the High Court requests guidance from a committee to determine if a fountain, as claimed by Muslims, or a Shivalinga, as claimed by Hindus, had been discovered inside the mosque.
The Allahabad High Court erred in denying the request, according to the appeal at the highest court.
The dispute involving prayer at the Gyanvapi mosque was transferred from the civil judge to the Varanasi District Judge on May 20 as per a Supreme Court ruling.
Earlier on September 12, the Varanasi Court had rejected a request from the Anjuman Islamia Masjid committee questioning the complaint brought by five Hindu women seeking permission to pray in the Gyanvapi mosque premises as being maintainable.
