In the ongoing Gyanvapi mosque case, the Supreme Court of India, led by Chief Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, has deferred the hearing to December 1, 2023, due to time constraints. This case, which has garnered significant attention, involves the mosque management committee’s challenge against the Varanasi court’s survey order and the maintainability of lawsuits concerning the mosque.
The Supreme Court is currently handling multiple petitions filed by the mosque management committee. These petitions challenge the spot inspection, the order of survey of the mosque, and an order upholding the lawsuits’ maintainability. The committee is relying on the 1991 law, specifically Section 3, which prohibits converting a place of religious worship into a different denomination or segment of the same religion.
In a significant development, the Varanasi district judge has given the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) until November 28 to submit its report on the mosque. This report is expected to play a crucial role in the ongoing legal proceedings.
During the hearing, the Gyanvapi mosque management committee rejected the Supreme Court’s suggestion to contest the evidentiary value of a Varanasi court commissioner’s report during the trial. This report, made in May last year, mentioned a purported ‘Shivling’ in the mosque’s wuzu area. Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, representing the mosque committee, argued that the appointment of the court commissioner was an illegal evidence-collecting exercise favoring the plaintiffs.
“The appointment itself was evidence collecting exercise,”
he alleged.
Chief Justice Chandrachud suggested,
“You can take all objections to the commissioner’s report during the trial.”
He explained that during the trial, the court commissioner would have to step into the witness box for cross-examination, allowing the committee to challenge the report’s evidentiary value.
However, Ahmadi expressed the committee’s preference for a Supreme Court decision on three key issues: the appointment of the court commissioner, carbon dating of the ‘Shivling’ (termed as a fountain by the Muslim side), and the maintainability of the suit considering the bar under the Places of Worship Act.
The Supreme Court had previously extended its interim orders directing the Varanasi district judge to protect the wuzu area in the Gyanvapi mosque, where the ‘Shivling’ was reportedly discovered. It had also ensured that Muslims would not be restricted from accessing other areas of the mosque.
This case highlights the complexities and sensitivities involved in matters of religious significance in India. The Varanasi district judge is concurrently conducting a joint trial of eight lawsuits claiming the existence of Hindu idols inside the Gyanvapi mosque. Meanwhile, several other related lawsuits, including those concerning the Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura, are pending. Additionally, a batch of petitions, some seeking to scrap the 1991 law and others demanding its strict enforcement, remain pending before the Supreme Court since March 2021.
