. .
November 30, 2022

CITY E NEWS

CITY'S OWN NEWS, TRAVEL AND ENTERTAINMENT WEB PORTAL

Gyanvapi Case: Supreme Court transfers Gyanvapi case to district court, next hearing will be held in second week of July

3 min read

During the hearing, the Supreme Court ordered that the Gyanvapi Masjid case will be heard by an experienced district judge in Varanasi. At the same time, the counsel for the Masjid Committee said that the constitution of the committee by the trial court is against the Worship Act of 1991 and against the Constitution.

The Supreme Court has transferred the Gyanvapi case to the District Court of Varanasi. The Supreme Court on Friday ordered that an experienced and senior judge will hear the matter. The Supreme Court gave this decision during the hearing of the petition of Anjuman Intejamia Masjid Committee against the order of the Varanasi District Court. At the same time, the Supreme Court ordered that its interim order of May 17 to protect the Shivling and allow prayers will remain intact. The petition of the Masjid Committee will be heard in the district court on priority basis. With this, the court has decided to hold the next hearing of the case in the second week of July after the summer vacations.

Supreme Court transferred the case to the district court
The Supreme Court ordered the transfer of the Gyanvapi Masjid case to District Judge Varanasi. The Supreme Court ordered that senior and experienced judicial officers of the Uttar Pradesh Judicial Service will hear the case. The court said that a person slightly more experienced and mature should hear the matter. We are not objecting to the trial judge but a more experienced hand should deal with the matter and it will benefit all the parties.

The court said that the trial of worship inside the mosque should be done by the district judge. The District Judge will decide on the petition of the Masjid Committee whether the trial by the Hindu side is maintainable. Till then the interim order- ‘Security of Shivling area, entry of Muslims for Namaz’ will continue.

The Supreme Court held that there is no bar on ascertainment of religious character under Section 3 of the Place of Worship Act of 1991. The court said, forget that there is a mosque on one side and a temple on the other. Suppose there is a Parsi temple here and there is a cross in the corner. Does the presence of ‘Agyari’ make the cross Agyari or Agyari a Christian?

The argument of the lawyer of the mosque committee
Senior advocate of the Masjid Committee, Huzefa Ahmadi, told the Supreme Court that all the orders passed by the trial court from the very beginning are capable of causing great public disturbance. Ahmadi said that the challenge of the committee is to appoint a commission by the trial court. This is against the Worship Act of 1991 and against the Constitution. The Act states that such disputes will result in major public disturbances. The commission’s report is being leaked selectively.

Huzefa Ahmadi also says that the plaintiffs before the trial court were able to seal the site, which was being used for the next 500 years. Ahmadi argued that what would happen on the ground until the committee’s petition was decided by the court. You have to see how this case is being used for four or five mosques across the country. This will create public disturbances to avoid which the Worship Act of 1991 was enacted.

Ahmadi said, “According to us what was found inside is not a Shivling, it is a fountain, Vaju Khana has been sealed and iron gates have been installed with heavy police presence.”

Supreme Court said, our aim is to maintain peace
The Supreme Court said that information cannot be leaked once the commission’s report is out. Don’t leak the matter to the press, only the judges open the report. The court said these are complex social problems and as a human being, no solution can be perfect. Our order is to maintain some degree of peace and the purpose of our interim orders is to give some relief. We are on a joint mission to maintain the spirit of unity in the country.

The lawyer for the Hindu side said, we are happy with the order
Vishnu Jain, counsel for the Hindu side, said, the Supreme Court has transferred the matter to the Varanasi District Court. The Supreme Court says that its order of protecting the Shivling area of ​​May 17 will continue. They have been asked to make arrangements for vaju. We are happy with this order.

Leave a Reply

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

English Hindi Punjabi Urdu