Single Judge Bench of District Judge AK Vishvesh of Varanasi Court has ruled in the favor of the Hindu side and has held their plea on Shrinagar-Gauri’s worship inside the mosque premises as maintainable and has scheduled the next hearing in the case for September 22nd.
Whereas, The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee has said the Gyanvapi mosque is a Waqf property and has questioned the maintainability of the plea and will move to the High Court as their advocate has earlier said.
But what is the relevance of the matter and where does this stand in the long history of the Hindu-Muslim religious divide and politics that has thrived for decades in India post-Independence?
The politics in the country is primarily based on religious and caste structure and this debate is something that has paved the way for years in the domain of politics deepening the years-long wounds of the Hindu-Muslim divide.
Years after the independence its first glance was seen in 1986 when the majoritarian Hindu population’s demand for access to the Ram mandir in Ayodhya was granted by the erstwhile Indian government led by PM Rajiv Gandhi.
But that wasn’t enough for the fanatic radical Hindu wing of the country that went on the rampage looking no bounds and vandalized the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on December 6th, 1992 which they alleged was built after Mughal emperor Babur razed the Ram Mandir that stood there hundreds of years before he invaded.
During these years a separate call of the same nature was also raised by the right-wing Hindu outfits with regard to two mosques, Varanasi, Gyanvapi Mosque, and Shahi Eidgah in Mathura, as they say, were built by razing the Hindu temples that stood before the Mughals invaded India.
Now three decades down the line after a mosque in Ayodhya was razed the fight remains the same but this time on a different case pertaining to the Gyanvapi and Kashi Vishwanath controversy in Varanasi. The verdict for which came today but isn’t the final in its shape.
The Beginning:
Along with the call from leaders of Vishwa Hindu Parishad and other BJP leaders leading the call for Babri Masjid demolition, a group of saints in Varanasi filed a petition at the Varanasi Civil Court in 1991 seeking permission to enter inside the mosque premises to perform worship rituals of Sringar-Gauri. But, didn’t happen much thereafter.
28 years down the line in 2019 the case came again into the legal frame when a local advocate Vijay Shankar Rastogi filed a petition claiming that the Gyanvapi Mosque was built illegally after the demolition of a portion of Kasi-Vishwanath temple that stood alongside the mosque today at the same controversial area.
It is also pertinent to mention that the petition was filed in December a month later when the Supreme Court bench led by the then CJI Ranjan Gogoi passed its final verdict on the Ayodhya Ram Mandir case in the favor of Ram Janmbhoomi (the Hindu party in the case).
In his petition Advocate, Rastogi said that an ASI survey must be ordered which was out rightly objected to by the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee that is involved in the caretaking of Gyanvapi Masjid alongside the Sunni Central Waqf Board which also represented the Babri Masjid in the historic case.
The Muslim party in the case took the matter to the Allahabad High Court after the Varanasi Court ordered in favor to initiate the ASI survey in April 2021.
1991: The PV Narasimha Rao-led Congress government at the center passed the Place of Worship Act (Special Provisions) in 1991. BJP opposed it. But welcomed Ayodhya as an exception and demanded that Kashi and Mathura should also be considered an exception.
1991: Gyanvapi case reached the court. A petition was filed in the court for the first time in 1991 regarding the Gyanvapi Masjid. The saints of Varanasi filed a petition in the civil court demanding worship there. In the petition, there was a demand to give the land of the mosque to the Hindus. But the management committee of the mosque out rightly opposed, it and claimed that this place of worship is in violation of the law.
2019: In December 2019, about a month after the Ayodhya verdict, a new petition was filed by Advocate Vijay Shanker Rastogi in the Varanasi Civil Court demanding an ASI survey of the Gyanvapi mosque.
2020: A hearing on the original petition was sought from the Civil Court of Varanasi.
2020: Allahabad High Court stayed the proceedings of the civil court and then reserved the decision on this matter.
2021: Despite the High Court's stay, the Varanasi Civil Court reopened the case in April and allowed the survey of the mosque.
2021: In August, five Hindu women filed a petition in the Varanasi Civil Court for permission to worship Shringar Gauri inside the Mosque premises.
2022: In April, the civil court ordered the survey and videography of the Gyanvapi mosque.
2022: Masjid Intzamiya challenged this order in the High Court on the basis of several technical aspects, which was dismissed.
2022: Masjid Intzamiya Gyanvapi Masjid approached the Supreme Court regarding the videography of the mosque in May.
2022: Survey report filed on May 16 before the Supreme Court begins hearing and Varanasi Civil Court orders sealing of the area inside the mosque where the Shivling was allegedly found and the Muslims were banned from offering Namaz.
2022: On May 17, the Supreme Court talked about the security of the alleged Shivling, but at the same time allowed the prayer.
2022: On May 20, the Supreme Court sent the matter to the district court of Varanasi, which is scheduled to deliver its verdict on September 12.
The Plot of the case prevalent in the Varanasi Court:
The case whose partial verdict upheld the maintainability of the Hindu side’s petition begins with the case filed by five women from Delhi seeking permission to worship the idols of Hindu gods placed near the outside walls of the mosque on a regular basis.
A committee was set up on the court’s order to initiate a video graphic survey of a Gyanvapi-Gauri Shrinagar complex and asked the committee to furnish a final report by May 17th.
The Muslim side in the case reached the Supreme Court against the proceeding of the Varanasi Court to which the apex court responded and will begin the hearing once the Varanasi court pronounces its final verdict.
With the Varanasi-based court giving its verdict to proceed with the next hearing on September 22nd, it will be crucial to see how the apex court watches out on the entire course of development in the case and comes up with a judgment that will be marked in the history of court’s importance in the communal Hindu- Muslim divide.