Chief Justice DY Chandrachud-led Bench of the Supreme Court will hear a slew
of issues concerning the Kashi Vishwanath-Gyanvapi dispute in Varanasi on December
1. The Bench adjourned the matter due to lack of time.
The Archaeological Survey of India or ASI is scheduled to present the
court a report on the Gyanvapi mosque by the next date of hearing. A Varanasi
district judge had last week given the ASI time to submit its report till
November 28.
A series of petitions filed by the mosque management committee
challenging the spot review and order of survey of the mosque, as well as an
order upholding the maintainability of the lawsuits lying before the top court.
Through its petition, the management committee attempting to bar all
claims over the access to the mosque or title of the Gyanvapi complex, relying
on a 1991 law.
The Section 3 of the law imposes a ban on individuals and groups of
people against converting a place of religious worship into a different
denomination, or even a different segment of the same religion.
Previously, it had sought to get the case thrown out under Order VII,
Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC). But last September, the Varanasi
district judge dismissed the committee’s application.
This judgment was upheld by the Allahabad high court in May, compelling
the committee to approach the apex court.
The other petition by the committee has challenged the May 2022 order of
the Varanasi court directing a complete survey of the mosque complex through an
advocate commissioner.
After the committee challenged this before the apex court, the Bench
declined to stop the survey but directed that the section of the complex where
a “Shivling” was reportedly found shall remain protected, adding that Muslims
will have the right to offer namaz in other sections of the mosque without any obstacle.
On May 20 last year, the Supreme Court transferred the lawsuit from a
civil judge to the Varanasi district judge, citing the “complexities and
sensitivities involved in the matter”.
It asked the district judge to decide on priority the application of the
management committee that challenged the maintainability of the suit.
In September, the apex court refused to halt the ASI survey of the
mosque, observing that it cannot find fault with the district court’s order of
July 21, nor would it interfere with every interlocutory direction passed in
the case.
The Bench held that the order of the district judge cannot be construed
to be without jurisdiction since the CPC empowers a court to issue a commission
for a scientific investigation, the report of which is subject to be argued and
tested at the time of trial.
At the same time, the bench noted that the high court was correct in
introducing some additional safeguards to circumscribe the order of the
district judge, which included the directions passed to ensure there will be no
excavation at the site, nor would there be destruction of any part of the
existing structure. The ASI will carry out its survey only using non-invasive
methods, the top court directed.
While the mosque management committee banks on the provisions of the 1991
law to challenge all proceedings relating to the religious character of the
Gyanvapi mosque, the law has, however, not prevented a spree of litigation in
recent months, which include several lawsuits regarding the Gyanvapi mosque in
Varanasi and Sri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura.
The Varanasi district judge is holding a joint trial of eight lawsuits
claiming the existence of Hindu idols inside the Gyanvapi mosque, whereas there
are 10 suits pending before a Mathura trial judge relating to Sri Krishna
Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute.
Meanwhile, a batch of petitions, some seeking to scrap the 1991 law and
others asking for tight enforcement of the same law, remain pending before the
top court since March 2021.
NE Watch Desk
