Gyanvapi Mosque Case: Allahabad HC’s Verdict Today On Plea Against Allowing Hindus To Pray In Vyas Tehkhana sattaex.com

Gyanvapi Mosque Case: Allahabad HC’s Verdict Today On Plea Against Allowing Hindus To Pray In Vyas Tehkhana sattaex.com


Curated By: Sanstuti Nath

Last Updated: February 26, 2024, 08:03 IST

The mosque has four ‘tahkhanas’ (cellars) in the basement, of which one is still in the possession of the Vyas family, who used to live there (Photo: News18)

The Varanasi district court ruled on January 31 that a priest can perform prayers before the idols in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi mosque

The Allahabad High Court is set to deliver its verdict today in the Gyanvapi Mosque committee’s appeal challenging the Varanasi district judge’s order allowing ‘Puja’ inside the ‘Vyas ka Tehkhana’ (southern cellar of the mosque).

A bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal on February 15 reserved the judgment after a four-day hearing on the appeal filed by the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (AIMC), which looks after the affairs of the mosque adjacent to the Kashi Vishwanath temple.

The decision will be pronounced at 10 am on Monday (February 26).

AIMC Plea on Gyanvapi Cellar: Timeline

  • AIMC had moved the high court on February 2, hours after the Supreme Court refused to urgently hear its plea against the Varanasi district court order allowing Puja in Vyas Ji ka Tehkhana, and asked it to approach the high court.
  • The Varanasi district court ruled on January 31 that a priest can perform prayers before the idols in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi mosque. The court directed the authorities to make arrangements for the worship of the idols by plaintiff Shailendra Kumar Pathak Vyas and a priest nominated by Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Trust within seven days.
  • Following the verdict, the puja was performed in the Gyanvapi compound earlier this month for the first time in three decades.
  • The mosque has four ‘tahkhanas’ (cellars) in the basement, of which one is still in the possession of the Vyas family, who used to live there.
  • The court’s order followed a petition filed by Shailendra Kumar Pathak Vyas against the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, which manages the Gyanvapi mosque.
  • According to the lawsuit, priest Somnath Vyas used to perform prayers there till 1993 when the cellar was closed by the authorities. Shailendra Kumar Pathak is the maternal grandson of Somnath Vyas.
  • On February 2, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the Muslim side’s plea to stay the Varanasi court’s January 31 order allowing the Hindu side to offer prayers in the southern cellar of Gyanvapi mosque.
  • The high court had granted time until February 6 for the Masjid Committee to amend its pleas to include a challenge to a January 17 order consequent to which the January 31 order was passed.
  • The Court on February 12 heard an appeal moved by the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee challenging the Varanasi District Court’s January 31 order allowing Hindus to perform prayers in the southern cellar of the mosque–Vyas Ji ka Tehkhana.

Earlier, All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) president Asaduddin Owaisi said that the judgement by the Varanasi court to allow Hindu devotees to offer prayers inside the ‘Vyas Ka Tekhana’ area inside the Gyanvapi mosque complex was a violation of the Places of Worship Act.

“The judge who gave the decision was his last day before retirement. The judge appointed the District Magistrate as receiver on January 17 and finally, he has directly given the verdict. He himself said that no prayers had been offered since 1993. It has been 30 years. How does he know there is an idol inside? This is a violation of the Places of Worship Act,” he said.

“He has ordered to open the grills within seven days. At least 30 days should have been given to make an appeal. This is a wrong decision. Till the time Modi government does not state that they stand by the Places of Worship Act this will go on. During the Babri Masjid title suit judgement, I had raised this apprehension. Places of Worship Act was made a part of the basic structure of the Supreme Court decision, then why are the lower courts not following the order?” Owaisi added.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *