The Supreme Court on Thursday said it will wait for the Varanasi district court’s decision on a suit filed by Hindu women in the Gyanvapi mosque case and adjourned the hearing to the first week of October.
The court was hearing a plea challenging the survey of the Gyanvapi-Shringar Gauri complex in Varanasi, where a ‘Shivling’ is stated to have been found.
The Varanasi District Court will give its verdict on July 21 on the Gyanvapi Mosque management committee’s challenge to the validity of trial court’s order, appointing the court commissioner to survey the Mosque, which led to the discovery of the Shivling.
The Mosque Management Committee, through Huzefa Ahmadi, said the order appointing the commissioner was like a poison tree, whose poison fruit – the report – has created a situation and perception, which attempts to alter the status quo of the Mosque existing for centuries.
The district court in Varanasi had heard one of the plaintiffs on Tuesday into the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri temple case.
The court also declined to entertain two fresh petitions seeking right to worship the ‘Shivling’ said to be found at the disputed Gyanvapi site, which is adjacent to the Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi and its carbon dating.
A three-judge bench headed by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud took up a fresh plea by the Anjuman Intezemia Masjid Committee seeking its permission to worship the Shivling.
On May 17, the top court had directed the District Magistrate of Varanasi to ensure the protection of the area inside the Gyanvapi-Shringar Gauri complex where the ‘Shivling’ was said to have been found and allowed Muslims to offer ‘namaz’ and perform religious observances.
On Tuesday, lawyer Man Bahadur Singh had represented litigant Rakhi Singh in the Varanasi district court and claimed that the Muslim side was misleading and confusing the court on the Places of Worship Act and the Waqf Act.
He said in the next hearing, their argument will be completed, after which the Anjuman Intezamia will present its arguments.
Rakhi Singh and others had filed a petition seeking permission for daily worship of Hindu deities whose idols are located on an outer wall of the mosque but the Muslim side had urged the court to dismiss the case.
Her lawyer Shivam Gaur contested the stand of the Muslim side that the case was not maintainable, saying “it is completely wrong”.
“The Places of Worship Act, Waqf Act and Kashi Vishwanath Act, which the Muslim side has repeatedly cited, are not applicable in my case,” the lawyer said.