The Hindu side in the Gyanvapi case urged a Varanasi court to approve an excavation at the complex, citing the Archaeological Survey of India’s expertise. They seek to verify claims of the “Jyotirlinga” beneath the central dome, while the Muslim side opposes the plea, raising concerns about damaging the mosque.
Varanasi: The Hindu side has urged a Varanasi court to approve a plea for an excavation at the Gyanvapi complex, citing the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) as the expert body in such matters. On Wednesday, after hearing arguments from both parties, Civil Judge Senior Division Jugal Shambhu adjourned the hearing until October 19.
This request for excavation comes after the Hindu side submitted its case on October 10, countering the arguments put forward by the Muslim side, represented by the Anjuman Intezamia Committee, on October 8. The Hindu side has proposed a 4×4 feet excavation at the Gyanvapi site, specifically targeting the “place of Jyotirlinga under the central dome.”
Madan Mohan Yadav, the lawyer representing the Hindu side, emphasized the ASI’s expertise in excavation work, mentioning previous excavations conducted at Sarnath and Rajghat in Varanasi. He also pointed out that the ASI was responsible for uncovering ancient sites like Mohenjodaro and Harappa, strengthening the plea for ASI’s involvement in the Gyanvapi excavation.
Read Also: [Gyanvapi Case] Muslim Party Presents Arguments, Court Sets Next Hearing for October 10
Yadav said, “The advocates of the Hindu side argued the ASI survey was done in the case of five women plaintiffs earlier. The ASI has expertise in excavation.”
The Hindu side’s demand is based on the belief that the original site of the “Jyotirlinga” is situated under the central dome of the mosque at the Gyanvapi complex. They have also referred to historical accounts of “Geographical water” flowing from the ‘Argha’ into the Gyanvapi Kund, which is believed to have held special significance for those on a pilgrimage, being referred to as “Gyanoday Tirth.” The Hindu side contends that the Shivling, found in the Gyanvapi complex, should be scientifically examined to determine whether it is indeed a Shivling or merely a fountain, as the Muslim side argues.
The Muslim side is expected to present their arguments at the next hearing. During the previous hearing on October 8, the Muslim side’s lawyers argued against the Hindu side’s plea, highlighting that they had already appealed the case to the High Court and Supreme Court, making the matter in the trial court redundant. They further argued that an ASI survey had already been conducted in the complex, and there was no need for a second one.
They also raised concerns over the practicality of conducting an excavation within the mosque premises, pointing out that “digging a pit in the mosque premises for the survey was not practical in any way and could damage the mosque.” The Muslim side’s lawyers stressed that such an action could lead to irreversible damage to the structure.
In previous hearings, the Hindu side had argued that the “original Jyotirlinga” is located under the central dome of the mosque. The Hindu advocates have pushed for an examination by water engineers, geologists, and archaeologists to ascertain the historical and religious significance of the water flowing in the Gyanvapi Kund.
Regarding the “Shivling” discovered in the Gyanvapi complex, which the Muslim side refers to as a “wazukhana”, the Hindu side has called for scientific investigation. They argue that “the ‘Shivling’ found from the Gyanoday Tirth should be examined to ascertain whether it is a Shivling or a fountain.”
As both sides prepare for the next hearing on October 19, the case continues to draw significant attention, with the court expected to make a crucial decision on whether the excavation will proceed. The involvement of the ASI could provide critical evidence to resolve the ongoing dispute, which touches upon deep religious and historical sensitivities.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
