One hour after the official working hours in the SC till 5.10 pm, Justice D.Y. a bench of Chandrachud and PS Narasimha patiently listened to the protest of Senior Advocate Huzefa e Ahmadi, appearing for Management Committee, Anjuman Intezamiya Masjid, Varanasi, that the closure of the “Wuzu Khana” area would disrupt the prayer as it is necessary to take a bath before the prayer. .
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, said the bench has taken the right decision to seal the “Wuzu Khana” area where the Shivling was allegedly found. “If Muslims are allowed to wash hands, mouth and feet in the area, and someone sets foot on the Shivling, it will create a serious law and order problem. Muslims can use any other area within the mosque . For vashikaran purposes,” he said.
Ahmadi’s central contention that the interim order is a prima facie violation of the Protection of Places of Worship Act, 1991, which prohibited the change of character of any religious structure after August 15, 1947, asked the bench to stay the interim order. did not agree. The Varanasi court directed the district magistrate to seal the area concerned and not allow anyone to enter that space inside the Gyanvapi Masjid.
However, Justices Chandrachud and Narasimha observed that the trial court could not impose a cap of 20 on the number of Muslims entering the mosque for prayers. “The mosque will remain open for all Muslims to offer prayers and perform other religious rituals,” it said and posted the matter for detailed hearing on Thursday (May 19).
The bench, led by Rakhi Singh, through advocate Hari Shankar Jain, issued notices to five Hindu women who moved a Varanasi civil judge seeking unhindered right to worship Goddess Shringar Devi and other deities inside the Gyanvapi mosque. did. The original Kashi Vishwanath temple but was damaged and converted into a mosque by the then Mughal emperor Aurangzeb. On his plea, the trial court had on April 8 ordered the appointment of an advocate commissioner for local inspection and survey of the area.
The Shivling was allegedly found during the survey given by the trial court. Though the commissioner had not yet submitted the survey report, the plaintiff’s counsel Hari Shankar Jain made an urgent application on May 16 to seal the area and limit the number of Muslims entering the mosque for the purpose of prayers to only 20. sought to. The interim order granted almost all the reliefs prayed for by the plaintiff.
Ahmadi said, “None of a series of orders passed by the lower court with regard to the survey of the mosque by the advocate commissioner are. The orders are under the 1991 Act, which prohibits tampering with the character of any place of worship. The suit Declaring the matter as maintainable, the petition of the Masjid Committee is yet to be decided. But the trial court goes ahead and passes all kinds of interim orders.”
The bench had at one time offered that it may direct the trial court to decide on the petition of the Masjid Committee to declare the suit filed by Rakhi Singh and four other women earlier as not maintainable. Ahmadi said that in that case “the status quo, the existing status quo must be restored before the suit can be filed”.
But Ahmadi later focused on the situation arising from the alleged location of the “shivalinga”, saying, “The premise of the suit is that the mosque was formerly a temple. Ayodhya In the judgment, the SC had ruled that that argument cannot be a ground for filing a suit to alter the character of a mosque. Prayers have been offered in this mosque since ancient times. The Supreme Court itself should examine the sustainability of the suit.”
UP counsel Ardhendumouli Prasad informed the court that the plaintiff’s lawyer Hari Shankar Jain was admitted to a hospital in Varanasi due to some illness and suggested that the court may hear Jain on Thursday.