VARANASI: Four women petitioners in the Gyanvapi Mosque-Shringar Gauri case on Thursday submitted an application in the court of Varanasi district judge, seeking scientific investigation and carbon dating to determine the nature, age and constituents of the “shivling” found during the advocate commissioner survey of the mosque on May 16.
Earlier, they had moved the Supreme Court with the same plea and were directed by it to take the matter to the trial court in Varanasi. The petition was moved through their advocates Hari Shankar Jain and Vishnu Jain.
Giving details of the matter, Vishnu Jain said, “In the application filed in the Supreme Court on July 17, petitioner number 2 to 5 — Laxmi Devi, Sita Sahu, Manju Vyas and Rekha Pathak — in the case Rakhi Singh vs state of UP and others had sought ground penetrating radar (GPR) survey and carbon dating of the “shivling” found in the mosque’s ablution pond and permission to worship the deity.”
“The SC directed us to take the case to the trial court, where the initial case is being heard. Thus, we submitted our application before the district judge’s court in Varanasi on Thursday. The next hearing in the matter will take place on September 29,” he told TOI.
He said the exact age and dimensions of the discovered “shivling” could be ascertained only after its GPR survey and carbon dating by or under supervision of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). “The GPR survey is a must to find out the nature of construction beneath the “shivling” discovered on May 16,” he said.
He added, “The scientific investigation by carbon dating will enable determining the age, nature and other constituents of the “shivling”.”
The lawyers of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid (AIM), the Gyanvapi mosque management committee, Rayis Ahmed and Merajuddin Siddaqi declined any comment on the application.
“We will talk about it only after going through the details of the application submitted by the plaintiffs regarding GPR or carbon dating,” they said.
In Rakhi Singh vs state of UP and others, in which five women plaintiffs are seeking daily worship of goddess Shringar Gauri and other deities on the mosque premises, the court of civil judge (senior division) Ravi Kumar Diwakar had on April 8, 2022, ordered court commission survey of the Gyanvapi mosque. The survey took place between May 6 and 16 and on the last day, the Hindu side’s lawyers claimed to have discovered a “shivling” in the ablution pond of the mosque.
Before the commission report could be submitted to the court on May 19, the AIM moved the apex court, which transferred the civil suit to the district judge asking to finalise the issue of maintainability.
The SC also dealt with the situation that arose in the immediate aftermath of the discovery of the “shivling” and ordered protection of the concerned area while asking the Muslims to perform ‘wuzu’ (ablution) at a different place for offering namaz at the pre-designated place inside the mosque.
Before the district judge’s court decided the maintainability of the case on September 12, the women plaintiffs reached the apex court demanding GPR survey and carbon dating of the “shivling”.
No temple was demolished to build mosque: AIM to court
Anjuman Intezamia Masajid — the Gyanvapi mosque management committee — on Thursday filed its reply in the case in which five women plaintiffs have sought right to worship Shringar Gauri and other deities on the Gyanvapi mosque compound, claiming that no temple was demolished to build the present structure. “The mosque and the temple exist at their original places,” the AIM claimed.
The reply was filed after the hearing in the matter resumed at the district judge’s court here on Thursday. The court fixed September 29 for the next hearing in the case.
Furthermore, of the 16 applications seeking to become a party in the case, seven were rejected by district judge Ajay Krishna Vishvesha by terming them as “not pressed” while one was withdrawn.
Following the September 12 order of the district judge that the case was maintainable, its regular hearing started from Thursday. The AIM advocates, Merajuddin Siddaqi and Rayis Ahmed, submitted their reply against the points made in the suit of the women plaintiffs.
Ahmed said, “The reply against most of the points in the suit of the plaintiffs are the same. It has already been argued before the court while challenging the maintainability of the case.”
“We have made it clear that no temple was demolished for the construction of the mosque. The mosque and the temple exist at their original places. If one of the 12 Jyotirlingas existed at Kashi Vishwanath temple, how could claims be made for two Jyotirlingas at another site by raising the issue of old temple and new temple,” said Ahmed, mentioning the points made in the reply.
Regarding their plea to seek time of eight weeks from the court to start any further processing, the duo said, “While transferring the case to district judge’s court on May 20, the Supreme Court had mentioned that the aggrieved party in the case could go to an upper court. In view of it, we had sought time. The matter was discussed before the court but its order is awaited.”