Express News Service
LUCKNOW: While dismissing the petition of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid (AIM), the management committee of Gyanvapi mosque and upholding the maintainability of the petition filed by five Hindu women plaintiffs, Varanasi district court judge Dr AK Vishvesha also asked the plaintiffs to produce the evidence to substantiate the claim of worship of the deities in the mosque premises till 1993.
While going through the order, while the district judge says that the suit of the plaintiffs is not barred by the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, he has also sought the history of puja and rituals offered to deities at different places on mosque property.
On Page 12 of the order, the judge claims that the plea of the plaintiffs comprises of averments claiming that even after August 15, 1947 till year 1993, they were allowed to have Darshan and Pooja of Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesh, Lord Hanuman and other visible and invisible deities daily which exist within the property in question at the backside of Gyanvapi in the northeast corner but, thereafter, Varanasi district administration barred their entry within the disputed property on all days except the fourth day of Vasantik Navaratra in Chaitra when the Hindu devotees were allowed to worship in old temple walls on mosque premises.
The order further states that if this contention is proved then the suit is not barred by Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
“At this stage, the averments made in the plaint are to be seen and plaintiffs will have right to prove their averments by cogent evidence,” says the order.
According to Hari Shankar Jain and other lawyers representing plaintiffs, in the light of the court order, they would produce the evidence required by the court through witnesses about the worship and the rituals which used to be performed for the deities at different places on mosque premises till 1993.
‘Substantiate claim of worship in mosque’
Judge claims that the plea of the plaintiffs comprises averments claiming that even after August 15, 1947, till the year 1993, they were allowed to have darshan of Maa Shringar Gauri, Ganesh, Hanuman and other visible and invisible deities daily which exist within the property in question at Gyanvapi
LUCKNOW: While dismissing the petition of Anjuman Intezamia Masajid (AIM), the management committee of Gyanvapi mosque and upholding the maintainability of the petition filed by five Hindu women plaintiffs, Varanasi district court judge Dr AK Vishvesha also asked the plaintiffs to produce the evidence to substantiate the claim of worship of the deities in the mosque premises till 1993.
While going through the order, while the district judge says that the suit of the plaintiffs is not barred by the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, he has also sought the history of puja and rituals offered to deities at different places on mosque property.
On Page 12 of the order, the judge claims that the plea of the plaintiffs comprises of averments claiming that even after August 15, 1947 till year 1993, they were allowed to have Darshan and Pooja of Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesh, Lord Hanuman and other visible and invisible deities daily which exist within the property in question at the backside of Gyanvapi in the northeast corner but, thereafter, Varanasi district administration barred their entry within the disputed property on all days except the fourth day of Vasantik Navaratra in Chaitra when the Hindu devotees were allowed to worship in old temple walls on mosque premises.
The order further states that if this contention is proved then the suit is not barred by Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.
“At this stage, the averments made in the plaint are to be seen and plaintiffs will have right to prove their averments by cogent evidence,” says the order.
According to Hari Shankar Jain and other lawyers representing plaintiffs, in the light of the court order, they would produce the evidence required by the court through witnesses about the worship and the rituals which used to be performed for the deities at different places on mosque premises till 1993.
‘Substantiate claim of worship in mosque’
Judge claims that the plea of the plaintiffs comprises averments claiming that even after August 15, 1947, till the year 1993, they were allowed to have darshan of Maa Shringar Gauri, Ganesh, Hanuman and other visible and invisible deities daily which exist within the property in question at Gyanvapi
