Image Courtesy: indiatoday.in
As the court of Varanasi district judge Ajay Krishna Vishvesha resumed hearing arguments in the Gyanvapi case, Anjuman Intezamia Masjid (AIM) which is the mosque management authority, and the defendant in the case, finished presenting their arguments against the maintainability of the suit under Order 7, Rule 11 (d) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
Hindu petitioners also presented their arguments and the court adjourned the case till tomorrow. Arguments took place amidst high security from 2 P.M onwards today, and reportedly only 60 people were allowed inside the court.
Adi Mahadev Kashi Dharmalay Mukti Nyas
Just yesterday, the Hindu petitioners announced that they had formed a trust to deal with the court case. Prabhat Khabar reports that the trust has been named Adi Mahadev Kashi Dharmalay Mukti Nyas. According to Jagran, the case will now have this trust as a party.
The trust is supported by four out of the original five women petitioners – Laxmi Devi, Sita Sahu, Manju Vyas and Rekha Pathak. The fifth, Kiran Singh, had withdrawn her name from the case, and now the Vishwa Vaidik Sanatan Sangh (VVSS) headed by Jitendra Singh ‘Visen’, a family member of Rakhi Singh, is a petitioner in a parallel case being heard by the fast-track court of civil judge (senior division) Mahendra Kumar Pandey. This second case pertains to restricting Muslim devotees from accessing the mosque, and beginning prayers as per Hindu tradition at the site. That case has been adjourned till July 14.
Hindu petitioners at odds with one another?
Meanwhile, Live Hindustan reports that there’s trouble brewing amidst the Hindu petitioners, with one group accusing the lawyer of siding with the Muslim defendants in the case. According to Live Hindustan, Visen claims that advocate Vishnu Jain, who is representing the remaining four Hindu women petitioners, is associated with the Indian Islamic Cultural Centre. According to Visen, this makes Jain sympathetic to the Muslim defendants and thus unfit to represent Hindu petitioners.
Brief background of the case
Readers would recall that in August 2021, five Hindu women – Rakhi Singh, Laxmi Devi, Sita Sahu, Manju Vyas and Rekha Pathak, who are all Varanasi residents – had moved the Civil Court (Senior Division), demanding that the Maa Shringar Gauri Temple be reopened, and people be allowed to offer prayers before the idols that are still kept there. Anjuman Intezamia Masjid (AIM), which is the mosque management authority, is the defendant in the case.
On April 8, 2022, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi, Ravi Kumar Diwakar had appointed Advocate Commissioner Ajai Kumar to carry out the survey and asked him to submit a report at the next hearing on May 10. The AIM opposed this, but their petition against the survey was dismissed by the Allahabad High Court on April 21. The lower court in Varanasi, on April 26, then again passed an order to carry out the survey.
The authorities began conducting the video survey on May 5, and AIM moved SC where it highlighted how the Places of Worship Act, 1991, prohibits changing the character of a place of worship from what it was on August 15, 1947. Thus, AIM said that the suit was not maintainable as per Order 7, Rule 11 (d) of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC).
The SC then transferred the case from the court of Civil Judge (Senior Division) Ravi Kumar Diwakar, who had originally ordered the survey, to the court of a more experienced District Judge to decide upon the maintainability of the suit given Order 7, Rule 11.
Meanwhile, Rakhi Singh withdrew from the case.
Now the case is being heard by judge Ajay Krishna Vishvesh of the Varanasi district court. The next date of hearing is July 13.
Related:
Gyanvapi Case: Mosque management committee makes submissions
Gyanvapi case: Varanasi district court to start hearings pertaining to Order 7 Rule 11
Gyanvapi case: Matter pertaining to prohibition of entry of Muslim devotees adjourned till July 14