Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

In the Gyanvapi dispute case before the Varanasi District Court, today the counsel for the Muslim side presented his remaining arguments against the maintainability of Hindu devotees' suit.

Court of District and Sessions Judge Dr. AK Vishvesha is hearing the application moved by the defendants (i.e.Muslim Parties) under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code questioning the maintainability of the suit filed by 5 Hindu women for performance of all rituals of Hindu deities allegedly residing inside the Gyanvapi complex. 

Post the hearing, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, who appears for the Hindu side, informed the media that the main contention raised by the Muslim side is that the instant suit by Hindu devotees is not maintainable as for effective rights under Article 25 of the Constitution of India, no civil suit can be filed. 

However, Jain said that this argument is against the ruling of the Top Court which has time and again said that for enforcement of fundamental rights under Article 25 of the Constitution, civil suits can also be filed.

Today, Advocate Abhay Nath Yadav, representing the Muslim side, resumed reading out points from the Muslim side's plea challenging the maintainability of the instant suit and completed all the 52 points. 

The next date of hearing has been fixed for July 12. The Muslim side is likely to present other legal points and judgments in support of their challenge to the instant suit. Following the same, the Hindu side will place its counter arguments. 

Earlier, the Muslim side had argued that the concerned civil lawsuit is barred by the Places of Worship Act despite the Hindu side's claim that when the deity is present at the location, the religious character of the place never changed.

In the matter, that has traveled to the Apex Court, the Top Court had ordered on May 20 that the Order 7 Rule 11, CPC application shall be decided on priority by the District Court.

The Top Court had also ordered the transfer of the civil suit from the court of Civil Judge Senior Division Varanasi to the court of District Judge for further proceedings. Court had opined that as there is a lot of complexity and sensitivity in this case, it should be heard by a senior Judicial officer.

Importantly, the Apex Court had extended the interim order it had passed on May 17, 2022 which protects the area where Shivlinga has been found to continue till the objection to the maintainability of the suit gets decided by the District court and 8 weeks thereafter.

The developments are taking place in the plea filed by 5 women seeking the performance of all rituals of Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesha, Lord Hanuman & other deities within the "old temple complex" allegedly existing inside the mosque site.

During the hearing of this suit, the Civil Court had appointed an Advocate Commissioner to survey the disputed Gyanvapi site and submit his report. 

Case Title: Rakhi Singh and Ors v. State of UP and Ors.