On 12th September Varanasi district court gave the verdict on Gyanvapi complex. The court dismissed the application submitted by Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee against the plea given a Hindu woman, seeking permission from the court to allow Hindus to worship Hindu deities residing in the Gyanvapi complex. The verdict given by the Varanasi court is considered as a massive win for the Hindus.
The court ordered a video survey of the disputed complex on 12th May where it is shown that a Shivling in the Wuzukhana of the disputed Gyanvapi complex. Thus the civil judge Ravi Kumar Diwakar ordered that disputed land should be sealed as requested by Advocate Hari Shankar jain to safeguard the premises.
After the Gyanvapi verdict which was given by the district court of Varanasi, the Islamists started their fear mongering activities. The court verdict was that the Gyanvapi Shringar Gauri case is maintainable and the data provided by the Hindus were acceptable, then the All India Muslim Personal Law Board started to fear mongering about the verdict.
Muslim side:
The application by the Masjid committee was filed under Order 7 Rule 11 of the CPC. This rule was essentially cited to claim that the suit (by the Hindu women) was barred in law. One of the provisions of Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC says that the suit will be dismissed by the court “where the suit appears from the statement in the plaint to be barred by any law”. The application by the Masjid committee said, “In this mosque, the common Muslims of Varanasi city and the nearby area have been offering Namaz five times and Namaz of Eid & Jumma without any interference.
The Parliament enacted the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 in the year 1991. In this Act, it has been provided that the places of worship will remain in the same position in which they were on 15th August 1947 and regarding such places of worship, no suit will be maintainable in any court. Further, in 1983, Shri Kashi Vishwanath Act, 1983 was enacted in Uttar Pradesh. In this Act, it has been provided that a Board of Trustees will be created which will look after Shri Kashi Vishwanath Mandir and all Gods and Goddesses in its compound”. The Masjid Committee said that the Gyanvapi Mosque (disputed) has been situated in the same place for 600 years and therefore, such suits are barred by the Places of Worship Act 1991.
The Masjid committee further said, “It has also been mentioned in application 35C that Gyanvapi Mosque, which has been described in para 12 of the plaint and its sub-paragraphs from I to XIV, is a Waqf property and it has been entered at Sl. No. 100 (Varanasi) as property of U.P. Sunni Central Board of Waqf, Lucknow. It has also been alleged in the application that the suit is barred by Act no.42 of 1991 and Act no.29 of 1983 and Act no.43 of 1995”.
Hindu side:
Hindu side said that the plea based on the Places of Worship Act of 1991, has been made by the Masjid committee only to extend the proceedings because they do not want the suit to be heard and decided on its merits.
The suit says that without the sanction of law, if anybody occupies a place or starts offering a place it will not refer to that person or religion. Under Hindu law, the property once vested in the deities shall continue to be the deity’s property and its destruction, if any, cannot change the nature of the property.
General Secretary of AIMPLB Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani in a statement on 12th September stated that the verdict of the court is disappointing.
The thing is that Gyanvapi is always the worship place of Hindus just like Ayodhya Ram janmabhoomi, so the verdict given by the Varanasi district court is absolutely legit and thus it has to be in favour of the truth. Islamist will always try to create a fear among the people, what they can do better, because the facts are showing that this place is worship for Hindus and not for Islams.
Commentaires