Varanasi Court to Deliver Its Verdict on Gyanvapi Premises
14 November, 2022 | Pranay Lad
A Varanasi fast-track court will rule on the request for the right to worship the "Shivling," which the Hindu side claimed to have discovered on the grounds of the Gyanvapi mosque.
During the final hearing on November 8, the court postponed the case until November 14. The court will rule on the Hindu side’s claims about the immediate start of Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar’s prayers, the transfer of ownership of the whole Gyanvapi complex to the Hindus, and the prohibition of Muslims from entering the Gyanvapi complex’s grounds.
While the case is in court, the Muslim side is permitted to worship on the property.
On November 11, the Supreme Court extended its earlier order to safeguard the area where the ‘Shivling,’ allegedly found in the Gyanvapi Mosque complex during the court survey, was said to have been found.
The Varanasi court had previously declined to let a “scientific analysis” of the alleged “Shivling” during proceedings.
The Hindu side had asked for carbon dating of the object inside the wazukhana of the Gyanvapi Mosque that they believed to be a Shivling.
The discovered building, according to the Muslim side, was a “fountain,” however. On September 22, the Hindu side filed a request with the Varanasi District Court asking for a carbon dating of the artefact they claimed to be the “Shivling.”
The Hindu side said that they will appeal the Varanasi court’s decision to deny permission for a “scientific study” of the alleged “Shivling” that was allegedly discovered on the grounds of the Gyanvapi mosque to the Supreme Court.
The Hindu side had requested a scientific assessment of the “Shivling” by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the carbon dating of the “Argha” and its vicinity of it during the hearing on September 29.
“It would not be appropriate to order the survey of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) because by granting such order the age, nature, and construction of the mentioned Shivling are known, even this does not suggest the possibility of a reasonable remedy,” the Varanasi court stated.
In the Gyanvapi case, the side’s attorney, Vishnu Jain, “The court denied our request for carbon dating. We’ll appeal this order to the Supreme Court and raise issues there. Although I can’t say when we’ll shortly appeal this order to the Supreme Court.”
“Though the court has denied the demand of requesting carbon dating, the option of moving to the High Court is open, and the Hindu side will make their argument before the High Court as well,” said Madan Mohan Yadav, another attorney for the Hindu side.
The Varanasi Court had stated that “if the claimed Shivling is destroyed by obtaining samples, then it will be in violation of the judgement of the Supreme Court” in reference to the Supreme Court’s ruling from May 17.
The Varanasi Court had stated that “if the Shivling is harmed, the religious feelings of the general people might also get injured.”
The age of an archaeological artefact or finding may be determined scientifically using carbon dating.
The court has deferred its decision on the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri issue after hearing the arguments from both parties.
On May 20, the Supreme Court issued an order transferring the civil judge’s civil case involving prayer at the Gyanvapi mosque to the Varanasi District Judge.
The Muslim side’s attorney, Akhlaq Ahmed, said that the Hindu side’s argument could not stand since it violated the Supreme Court’s ruling preserving the edifice (which the Muslim side claims to be a fountain and the Hindu side claims to be a Shivling).
“We responded to the carbon dating application. It is impossible for a stone to absorb carbon. The Supreme Court mandated that the object that the panel discovered be safeguarded in its ruling from May 17. The item cannot be opened since the SC’s order will take precedence. The Hindu side claims that while the procedure would be scientific, there will still be object manipulation. The test will include the use of chemicals. On October 14, we will act in accordance with the court’s directive “Ahmed spoke with the news agency.
Tohid Khan, a different attorney for the Muslim side, “Whether the application for carbon dating should be accepted or refused will be decided by the court. It’s a fountain, not a Shivling, that’s there. You may still turn on the fountain.”