In the Gyanvapi case, the Hindu side called for a comprehensive ASI survey and excavation of the Gyanvapi complex, claiming previous surveys were incomplete. The Muslim side, opposing this, argued prior surveys suffice and raised concerns over structural damage. A court hearing is scheduled for October 16.
Varanasi: In a crucial development in the ongoing Gyanvapi case, the Hindu side presented its submissions in response to the arguments made by the Muslim side earlier this week. Represented by Advocate Madan Mohan Yadav, the Hindu petitioners are demanding that the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) conduct a more comprehensive survey, including excavation, of the remaining parts of the Gyanvapi complex.
The court has now scheduled the next hearing for October 16.
Advocate Yadav, representing the Hindu side, argued before Civil Judge Senior Division Yughul Shambhu that the ASI’s previous survey of the Gyanvapi complex was incomplete. Yadav emphasized that without further excavation, the ASI would not be able to provide an accurate report. He urged the court to order a full excavation of the complex to reveal its historical and religious significance.
“The ASI was not in a position to furnish a correct report without excavation, and therefore it should be ordered to conduct the excavation and survey the entire Gyanvapi complex,” Yadav stated during the hearing. The Hindu side has remained adamant that only a thorough investigation can establish the true historical facts surrounding the complex.
On October 8, the Muslim side, represented by the Anjuman Intezamia Committee, presented its arguments opposing the Hindu side’s demands. The committee’s lawyers argued that since the Hindu side had already appealed to the higher courts, there was no point in debating the matter in the trial court. Moreover, they claimed that the previous ASI survey had already provided sufficient insights, making a second survey unnecessary.
The Muslim side also expressed concerns that further excavation, particularly digging a pit in the mosque premises, could cause significant damage to the structure. They argued that such a step would be impractical and might affect the mosque’s integrity.
A key element of the Hindu side’s claim centers around the belief that the original location of the ‘Jyotirlinga’ is under the dome of what is now considered a mosque in the Gyanvapi complex. They previously argued that water from the ‘Argha’ continuously flowed into the Gyanvapi Kund, and it was believed that drinking this water could bestow knowledge. According to their beliefs, the area is a significant pilgrimage site, referred to as ‘Gyanoday Tirth.’
Read Also: [Gyanvapi Case] Muslim Party Presents Arguments, Court Sets Next Hearing for October 10
The Hindu party has also demanded that the water system, once believed to flow through the complex, should be examined using advanced methods involving water engineering, geologists, and archaeologists.
One of the most contested points in the Gyanvapi case is the discovery of a structure that the Hindu side believes to be a ‘Shivling.‘ The Muslim side, however, contends that this structure is actually part of a “wazukhana,” or ablution tank, used for religious washing before prayers.
To resolve this debate, the Hindu side has demanded a thorough examination of the structure, urging experts to determine whether it is indeed a ‘Shivling’ or a fountain as claimed by the Muslim side.
With both sides firmly standing by their respective arguments, the court has now set the next hearing for October 16, where further discussions and submissions will take place. The outcome of this hearing could significantly impact the future course of this high-profile case, which continues to capture nationwide attention.
Both parties are hopeful that the upcoming court proceedings will provide clarity and resolution to their long-standing disputes over the Gyanvapi complex.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES