A court in Varanasi reserved its order on judgement in the Gyanvapi-Kashi Vishwanath judgement in a plea in which the Muslim party has challenged the maintainability of the suit filed by Hindu parties seeking worship rights inside the Gyanvapi mosque.
Today,the District Judge Dr AK Vishvesha has completed the hearing in the case ,although he is likely to pronounce his verdict on September 12, 2022.
The present plea was filed under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) by the Committee of Management of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid.
The Gyanvapi mosque has been in dispute after the Hindu devotees approached civil court and claimed if their right
to worship their God inside the premises of the mosque.
The pretext given by the Hindus is that on the it was a Hindu temple and holds Hindu deities.
A survey was ordered by the civil court ordered in the Gyanvapi Mosque by an advocate commissioner.
The advocate commissioner got the premises and Gyanwapi videographed and conducted the survey, for the same and also submitted a report to the civil court.
An application under Order VII Rule 11 of the CPC challenging the maintainability of the suit on ground that the Places of Worship Act of 1991, was filed by the Muslim party which claimed that during the height of the Ram Janmabhoomi movement, protection status was given to all religious structures as they stood on August 15, 1947.
It added that Section 4 of the Act states that the religious character of a place of worship existing on August 15, 1947 shall continue to be the same as it existed on that day.
It bars courts from entertaining cases regarding such places of worship. The provision further states that such cases already pending in courts would stand abated.
The suit in the civil court was transferred to the District Judge by the Supreme Court on May 20 in view of the sensitivity of the issue involved.
The Hindu parties said that without taking into account the survey report, the maintainability of the suit cannot be decided,.
The reason given by the Hindu party was that since the nature of the religious structure is the subject matter of the dispute,the justification by other party stands null.
The District Court had then asked the parties to the case to file their objections to the advocate commissioner’s survey report.