The Supreme Court Today (April 1st) declined to halt the Varanasi court’s decision permitting Hindu groups to conduct worship in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi Mosque. CJI Chandrachud led bench, directed both parties to maintain the status quo, allowing both communities to engage in religious prayers. Apex court also sought response of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple trustees on the plea of the mosque management committee.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court Today refused to stay the Hindu prayers in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi mosque and sought response of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple trustees on the plea of the mosque management committee.
The top court also ordered maintaining of status quo on offering of namaz by Muslims in the Gyanvapi premises in Varanasi.
The court was hearing a fresh plea of the Gyanvapi mosque management committee against an Allahabad High Court decision upholding a lower court’s order allowing Hindu prayers in the southern cellar of the mosque.
A bench headed by Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud also sought response of priest Shailendra Kumar Pathak Vyas by April 30 on the plea of the mosque committee.
The bench, which also comprised Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, was hearing the plea of the mosque committee which manages the affairs of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi.
The Supreme Court emphasized that the status quo
“shall not be disturbed by either of the parties without obtaining the previous sanction and leave of this Court,”
-as stated in the order.
Under the arrangement, Hindus will enter from the south to pray in the cellar, while Muslims will pray in the northern side upon entering from there. This arrangement is to remain in place until the case is conclusively decided.
“In light of the fact that namaz is being offered by Muslim communities without hindrance following the district court and High Court orders, and considering that prayers in tehkhana are limited to Hindu priests, it is crucial to maintain the status quo to enable both communities to perform religious worship,”
–the Court elaborated in its order.
Additionally, the Court issued notice to the Hindu parties regarding the appeal filed by Muslim parties and scheduled the matter for consideration in July. It also reiterated that Hindu parties must continue to conduct puja in accordance with the January 31 order of the civil court.
“The religious observance of Hindus shall be in accordance with the order of January 31, 2024,”
-the top court affirmed.
In declining to stay the offering of puja in the cellar, the Court pointed out the distinction between the access to the cellar for puja and the area where Muslims pray.
“Considering that prayers in the South (cellar) do not impact prayers in the North, we can conclude that namaz can continue and worship in the south cellar can also continue,”
-remarked CJI Chandrachud during the proceedings.
The bench presiding over the matter was addressing an appeal lodged by the Muslim parties against the verdict of the Allahabad High Court, which dismissed the petition contesting a Varanasi court’s order from January 31. This order permitted Hindu parties, through an interim arrangement, to conduct prayers and puja in the southern cellar/basement of the Gyanvapi Mosque.
The High Court had determined that there was substantial prima facie evidence indicating Hindu prayers had been conducted at the site since 1551 until their cessation in 1993. Additionally, it deemed the Uttar Pradesh government’s action in halting Hindu prayers via an oral directive in 1993 as illegal.
Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, representing the Muslim party, urged for a stay on the civil court’s directive, highlighting concerns that allowing puja within the mosque premises could exacerbate discord. He emphasized the potential difficulties in restoring the previous state if Hindu prayers within the cellar persist.
Ahmadi implored the Court to prevent further alterations at the site if it declined to stay the entire order at this juncture, citing multiple applications filed by Hindu parties before the civil court for various reliefs.
Referring to the actions as “salami tactics,” Ahmadi cautioned against incremental encroachments into the mosque’s space, drawing parallels to the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute.
Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, representing the Hindu parties, contended that the current orders did not warrant intervention by the Supreme Court at this stage, asserting that such matters typically do not undergo scrutiny at an interlocutory stage.
Divan underscored the comprehensive reasoning provided in the trial court and high court orders, suggesting that there was no need for the apex court’s interference at this juncture.
READ PREVIOUS REPORTS ON GYANVAPI MOSQUE CASE
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
