#Gyanvapi Case Petitions

[thenewsfactsnow]

Gyanvapi Case Verdict: Court Rejects All Petitions

In a crucial judgment in the Gyanvapi case, the Allahabad High Court today rejected all petitions by the mosque committee challenging civil suits that seek restoration of a temple at the mosque site. The high court asked the Varanasi court to complete hearing in one of these civil suits, filed in 1991, within six months. Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal has ruled that the 1991 suit is maintainable…

[globalnews1]

Getty ImagesThe Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi city is at the centre of a dispute in courtIndia's top court is hearing a number of petitions challenging a decades-old law that preserves the character and identity of religious places as they existed at the time of the country's independence in 1947.The law, introduced in 1991, prohibits converting or altering the character of any place of worship and prevents courts from entertaining disputes over its status, with the exception of the Babri Masjid case, which was explicitly exempted.The Babri Masjid, a 16th-Century mosque, was at the heart of a long-standing dispute, culminating in its demolition by a Hindu mob in 1992. A court verdict in 2019 awarded the site to Hindus for the construction of a temple, reigniting debates over India's religious and secular fault lines.The current petitions, including one from a member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), argue that the 1991 law infringes on religious freedom and constitutional secularism. The hearing comes against the backdrop of Hindu groups filing cases to challenge the status of many mosques, claiming they were built over demolished Hindu temples. Many, including opposition leaders and Muslim groups, have defended the law, saying it is crucial to safeguard the places of worship of religious minorities in a Hindu-majority India. They also question the nature of historical evidence presented by the petitioners in support of their claims.They say that if the law is struck down or diluted, it could open the floodgates for a slew of similar challenges and inflame religious tensions, especially between Hindus and Muslims.On Thursday, the Supreme Court barred courts from registering fresh cases challenging the ownership of places of worship or ordering surveys to establish their character and identity until further notice. It is next set to hear the issue in February.Getty ImagesA court in Rajasthan recently admitted a petition that claimed there was a temple where the revered Ajmer Sharif shrine standsWhy was the law introduced?The law says that the religious character of any place of worship - temples, mosques, churches and gurdwaras - must be maintained as it was on 15 August 1947, when Indian became independent. The Place of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 was brought in by the then-Congress party government while a movement - led by members of the Hindu nationalist BJP - to build a temple at the site of the Babri Masjid in the northern town of Ayodhya was getting stronger. The aggressive campaign triggered riots in several parts of the country and, according to some estimates, left hundreds dead.The violence was a painful reminder of the religious strife India had witnessed during partition in 1947.While introducing the bill in parliament, then home minister SB Chavan expressed anxiety about "an alarming rise of intolerance propagated by certain sections for their narrow vested interests". These groups, he said, were resorting to "forcible conversion" of places of worship in an attempt to create new disputes.The BJP, then in the opposition, strongly opposed the bill, with some lawmakers walking out of parliament. An MP from the party said he believed the bill was brought in to appease the minorities and would only increase the rift between Hindus and Muslims.Apart from archaeological sites - whether religious or not - the only exception to the law was the Babri Masjid, as a legal challenge against the structure existed even before independence.Hindu mobs, however, demolished the mosque within months of the enactment of the law. In 2019, while awarding the disputed land to Hindu groups, India's Supreme Court said that the demolition of the mosque was an illegal act.Getty ImagesViolence broke out in Sambhal town last month after a court ordered a survey of a 16th Century mosqueWhy does it keep making news?The Supreme Court's ruling on the law will be crucial to the fate of dozens of religious structures, especially those of Muslims, that are contested by Hindu groups. These include Gyanvapi and Shahi Eidgah, two disputed mosques in the holy cities of Varanasi and Mathura.Critics also point out that the historical nature of the sites will make it hard to conclusively establish divergent claims, leaving scope for bitter inter-religious battles and violence.While the hearing is being closely watched, the law also makes news whenever there is a fresh development in cases challenging mosques. Two weeks ago, a court in Rajasthan issued notices to the government after admitting a petition claiming that the revered Ajmer Sharif dargah - a 13th-Century Sufi shrine that attracts thousands of visitors every day - stood over a Hindu temple.And last month, four people were killed in Sambhal town in Uttar Pradesh state when violence broke out during a court-ordered survey of a 16th-Century mosque. Muslim groups have contested the survey in the Supreme Court.There have been tensions over other court-ordered surveys earlier, including in the case of the Gyanvapi mosque. Hindu groups said the 17th-Century mosque was built by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb on the partial ruins of the Kashi Vishwanath temple. Muslim groups opposed the survey ordered by a local court, saying it violated the 1991 law. But in 2022, a Supreme Court bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud did not stop the survey from going ahead. He also observed that the 1991 law did not prevent investigations into the status of a place of worship as of 15 August 1947, as long as it did not seek to alter it.Many have criticised this since then, with former civil servant Harsh Mander saying that it "opened the floodgates for this series of orders by courts that run contrary to the 1991 law"."If you allow the survey of a mosque to determine if a temple lay below it, but then prohibit actions to restore a temple at that site, this is a surefire recipe for fostering resentment, hate and fear that could detonate for years in bitter feuds between people of diverse faiths," Mr Mander wrote.Thursday's Supreme Court order means that these surveys and ongoing court cases remain on hold for now.Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook

[newsclickofficial]

Getty ImagesThe Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi city is at the centre of a dispute in courtIndia's top court is hearing a number of petitions challenging a decades-old law that preserves the character and identity of religious places as they existed at the time of the country's independence in 1947.The law, introduced in 1991, prohibits converting or altering the character of any place of worship and prevents courts from entertaining disputes over its status, with the exception of the Babri Masjid case, which was explicitly exempted.The Babri Masjid, a 16th-Century mosque, was at the heart of a long-standing dispute, culminating in its demolition by a Hindu mob in 1992. A court verdict in 2019 awarded the site to Hindus for the construction of a temple, reigniting debates over India's religious and secular fault lines.The current petitions, including one from a member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), argue that the 1991 law infringes on religious freedom and constitutional secularism. The hearing comes against the backdrop of Hindu groups filing cases to challenge the status of many mosques, claiming they were built over demolished Hindu temples. Many, including opposition leaders and Muslim groups, have defended the law, saying it is crucial to safeguard the places of worship of religious minorities in a Hindu-majority India. They also question the nature of historical evidence presented by the petitioners in support of their claims.They say that if the law is struck down or diluted, it could open the floodgates for a slew of similar challenges and inflame religious tensions, especially between Hindus and Muslims.On Thursday, the Supreme Court barred courts from registering fresh cases challenging the ownership of places of worship or ordering surveys to establish their character and identity until further notice. It is next set to hear the issue in February.Getty ImagesA court in Rajasthan recently admitted a petition that claimed there was a temple where the revered Ajmer Sharif shrine standsWhy was the law introduced?The law says that the religious character of any place of worship - temples, mosques, churches and gurdwaras - must be maintained as it was on 15 August 1947, when Indian became independent. The Place of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 was brought in by the then-Congress party government while a movement - led by members of the Hindu nationalist BJP - to build a temple at the site of the Babri Masjid in the northern town of Ayodhya was getting stronger. The aggressive campaign triggered riots in several parts of the country and, according to some estimates, left hundreds dead.The violence was a painful reminder of the religious strife India had witnessed during partition in 1947.While introducing the bill in parliament, then home minister SB Chavan expressed anxiety about "an alarming rise of intolerance propagated by certain sections for their narrow vested interests". These groups, he said, were resorting to "forcible conversion" of places of worship in an attempt to create new disputes.The BJP, then in the opposition, strongly opposed the bill, with some lawmakers walking out of parliament. An MP from the party said he believed the bill was brought in to appease the minorities and would only increase the rift between Hindus and Muslims.Apart from archaeological sites - whether religious or not - the only exception to the law was the Babri Masjid, as a legal challenge against the structure existed even before independence.Hindu mobs, however, demolished the mosque within months of the enactment of the law. In 2019, while awarding the disputed land to Hindu groups, India's Supreme Court said that the demolition of the mosque was an illegal act.Getty ImagesViolence broke out in Sambhal town last month after a court ordered a survey of a 16th Century mosqueWhy does it keep making news?The Supreme Court's ruling on the law will be crucial to the fate of dozens of religious structures, especially those of Muslims, that are contested by Hindu groups. These include Gyanvapi and Shahi Eidgah, two disputed mosques in the holy cities of Varanasi and Mathura.Critics also point out that the historical nature of the sites will make it hard to conclusively establish divergent claims, leaving scope for bitter inter-religious battles and violence.While the hearing is being closely watched, the law also makes news whenever there is a fresh development in cases challenging mosques. Two weeks ago, a court in Rajasthan issued notices to the government after admitting a petition claiming that the revered Ajmer Sharif dargah - a 13th-Century Sufi shrine that attracts thousands of visitors every day - stood over a Hindu temple.And last month, four people were killed in Sambhal town in Uttar Pradesh state when violence broke out during a court-ordered survey of a 16th-Century mosque. Muslim groups have contested the survey in the Supreme Court.There have been tensions over other court-ordered surveys earlier, including in the case of the Gyanvapi mosque. Hindu groups said the 17th-Century mosque was built by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb on the partial ruins of the Kashi Vishwanath temple. Muslim groups opposed the survey ordered by a local court, saying it violated the 1991 law. But in 2022, a Supreme Court bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud did not stop the survey from going ahead. He also observed that the 1991 law did not prevent investigations into the status of a place of worship as of 15 August 1947, as long as it did not seek to alter it.Many have criticised this since then, with former civil servant Harsh Mander saying that it "opened the floodgates for this series of orders by courts that run contrary to the 1991 law"."If you allow the survey of a mosque to determine if a temple lay below it, but then prohibit actions to restore a temple at that site, this is a surefire recipe for fostering resentment, hate and fear that could detonate for years in bitter feuds between people of diverse faiths," Mr Mander wrote.Thursday's Supreme Court order means that these surveys and ongoing court cases remain on hold for now.Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook

[boome11]

Getty ImagesThe Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi city is at the centre of a dispute in courtIndia's top court is hearing a number of petitions challenging a decades-old law that preserves the character and identity of religious places as they existed at the time of the country's independence in 1947.The law, introduced in 1991, prohibits converting or altering the character of any place of worship and prevents courts from entertaining disputes over its status, with the exception of the Babri Masjid case, which was explicitly exempted.The Babri Masjid, a 16th-Century mosque, was at the heart of a long-standing dispute, culminating in its demolition by a Hindu mob in 1992. A court verdict in 2019 awarded the site to Hindus for the construction of a temple, reigniting debates over India's religious and secular fault lines.The current petitions, including one from a member of Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), argue that the 1991 law infringes on religious freedom and constitutional secularism. The hearing comes against the backdrop of Hindu groups filing cases to challenge the status of many mosques, claiming they were built over demolished Hindu temples. Many, including opposition leaders and Muslim groups, have defended the law, saying it is crucial to safeguard the places of worship of religious minorities in a Hindu-majority India. They also question the nature of historical evidence presented by the petitioners in support of their claims.They say that if the law is struck down or diluted, it could open the floodgates for a slew of similar challenges and inflame religious tensions, especially between Hindus and Muslims.On Thursday, the Supreme Court barred courts from registering fresh cases challenging the ownership of places of worship or ordering surveys to establish their character and identity until further notice. It is next set to hear the issue in February.Getty ImagesA court in Rajasthan recently admitted a petition that claimed there was a temple where the revered Ajmer Sharif shrine standsWhy was the law introduced?The law says that the religious character of any place of worship - temples, mosques, churches and gurdwaras - must be maintained as it was on 15 August 1947, when Indian became independent. The Place of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 was brought in by the then-Congress party government while a movement - led by members of the Hindu nationalist BJP - to build a temple at the site of the Babri Masjid in the northern town of Ayodhya was getting stronger. The aggressive campaign triggered riots in several parts of the country and, according to some estimates, left hundreds dead.The violence was a painful reminder of the religious strife India had witnessed during partition in 1947.While introducing the bill in parliament, then home minister SB Chavan expressed anxiety about "an alarming rise of intolerance propagated by certain sections for their narrow vested interests". These groups, he said, were resorting to "forcible conversion" of places of worship in an attempt to create new disputes.The BJP, then in the opposition, strongly opposed the bill, with some lawmakers walking out of parliament. An MP from the party said he believed the bill was brought in to appease the minorities and would only increase the rift between Hindus and Muslims.Apart from archaeological sites - whether religious or not - the only exception to the law was the Babri Masjid, as a legal challenge against the structure existed even before independence.Hindu mobs, however, demolished the mosque within months of the enactment of the law. In 2019, while awarding the disputed land to Hindu groups, India's Supreme Court said that the demolition of the mosque was an illegal act.Getty ImagesViolence broke out in Sambhal town last month after a court ordered a survey of a 16th Century mosqueWhy does it keep making news?The Supreme Court's ruling on the law will be crucial to the fate of dozens of religious structures, especially those of Muslims, that are contested by Hindu groups. These include Gyanvapi and Shahi Eidgah, two disputed mosques in the holy cities of Varanasi and Mathura.Critics also point out that the historical nature of the sites will make it hard to conclusively establish divergent claims, leaving scope for bitter inter-religious battles and violence.While the hearing is being closely watched, the law also makes news whenever there is a fresh development in cases challenging mosques. Two weeks ago, a court in Rajasthan issued notices to the government after admitting a petition claiming that the revered Ajmer Sharif dargah - a 13th-Century Sufi shrine that attracts thousands of visitors every day - stood over a Hindu temple.And last month, four people were killed in Sambhal town in Uttar Pradesh state when violence broke out during a court-ordered survey of a 16th-Century mosque. Muslim groups have contested the survey in the Supreme Court.There have been tensions over other court-ordered surveys earlier, including in the case of the Gyanvapi mosque. Hindu groups said the 17th-Century mosque was built by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb on the partial ruins of the Kashi Vishwanath temple. Muslim groups opposed the survey ordered by a local court, saying it violated the 1991 law. But in 2022, a Supreme Court bench headed by then chief justice DY Chandrachud did not stop the survey from going ahead. He also observed that the 1991 law did not prevent investigations into the status of a place of worship as of 15 August 1947, as long as it did not seek to alter it.Many have criticised this since then, with former civil servant Harsh Mander saying that it "opened the floodgates for this series of orders by courts that run contrary to the 1991 law"."If you allow the survey of a mosque to determine if a temple lay below it, but then prohibit actions to restore a temple at that site, this is a surefire recipe for fostering resentment, hate and fear that could detonate for years in bitter feuds between people of diverse faiths," Mr Mander wrote.Thursday's Supreme Court order means that these surveys and ongoing court cases remain on hold for now.Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/1024/branded_news/58b7/live/61a00450-b6d9-11ef-8b34-156b65e86dfb.jpg 2024-12-13 06:07:31

[bhaskarlive]

Gyanvapi case: Varanasi court rejects Hindu side’s plea for additional ASI survey

In a setback to petitioners representing the Hindu side, a court in Varanasi on Friday rejected a plea seeking additional survey by the Archaeological Survey of India at the Gyanvapi complex.

Civil Judge (senior division), of Fast Track Court, Varanasi, dismissed the petition filed by Vijay Shankar Rastogi.

Source: bhaskarlive.in

[news365timesindia]

[ad_1] File photo of the Gyanvapi Mosque (Photo: PTI)2 min read Last Updated : Oct 10 2024 | 6:22 PM IST Lawyers representing the Hindu side on Thursday furnished their submissions before a court here in response to the arguments put forth by the Muslim side in the Gyanvapi case two days ago. The Hindu side's plea had demanded a survey by the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) in the remaining parts of the Gyanvapi complex. Click here to connect with us on WhatsApp Following the submissions, the court posted the hearing on October 16. Advocate Madan Mohan Yadav, who is representing the Hindu side, said he appeared before Civil Judge Senior Division Yughul Shambhu, and submitted that the survey done by the ASI in the Gyanvapi complex was incomplete.  Yadav said the ASI was not in a position to furnish a correct report without excavation and therefore it should be ordered to conduct the excavation and survey the entire Gyanvapi complex. On October 8, the Muslim side -- Anjuman Intezamia Committee -- had presented its views on the petition. The lawyers then reportedly submitted before the court that when the Hindu side has appealed to agitate the case in the high court and Supreme Court, there was no point arguing the matter in the trial court. They also submitted that when the ASI survey of the Gyanvapi complex had been done once already, there was no justification for conducting another survey. The lawyers of the committee had also stated that digging a pit in the mosque premises for the survey was not practical in any way, and could damage the mosque. Previously, the Hindu side had argued that the original place of 'Jyotirlinga' was in the centre, under the dome of the purported mosque located in the Gyanvapi complex. "Geographical water used to flow continuously from the 'Argha' which used to collect in the Gyanvapi Kund. It was believed that drinking this water gives knowledge. Therefore, this pilgrimage is also considered as 'Gyanoday Tirth'," it was argued earlier during hearings. The Hindu party has demanded the examination of the water through water engineering, geologists and archeologists. Further, the 'Shivling' found from the Gyanoday Tirth, which the Muslim side termed as the "wazukhana", should also be examined to ascertain whether it is a 'Shivling' or a fountain, they had said. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)First Published: Oct 10 2024 | 6:22 PM IST [ad_2] Source link

[news365times]

[ad_1] File photo of the Gyanvapi Mosque (Photo: PTI)2 min read Last Updated : Oct 10 2024 | 6:22 PM IST Lawyers representing the Hindu side on Thursday furnished their submissions before a court here in response to the arguments put forth by the Muslim side in the Gyanvapi case two days ago. The Hindu side's plea had demanded a survey by the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) in the remaining parts of the Gyanvapi complex. Click here to connect with us on WhatsApp Following the submissions, the court posted the hearing on October 16. Advocate Madan Mohan Yadav, who is representing the Hindu side, said he appeared before Civil Judge Senior Division Yughul Shambhu, and submitted that the survey done by the ASI in the Gyanvapi complex was incomplete.  Yadav said the ASI was not in a position to furnish a correct report without excavation and therefore it should be ordered to conduct the excavation and survey the entire Gyanvapi complex. On October 8, the Muslim side -- Anjuman Intezamia Committee -- had presented its views on the petition. The lawyers then reportedly submitted before the court that when the Hindu side has appealed to agitate the case in the high court and Supreme Court, there was no point arguing the matter in the trial court. They also submitted that when the ASI survey of the Gyanvapi complex had been done once already, there was no justification for conducting another survey. The lawyers of the committee had also stated that digging a pit in the mosque premises for the survey was not practical in any way, and could damage the mosque. Previously, the Hindu side had argued that the original place of 'Jyotirlinga' was in the centre, under the dome of the purported mosque located in the Gyanvapi complex. "Geographical water used to flow continuously from the 'Argha' which used to collect in the Gyanvapi Kund. It was believed that drinking this water gives knowledge. Therefore, this pilgrimage is also considered as 'Gyanoday Tirth'," it was argued earlier during hearings. The Hindu party has demanded the examination of the water through water engineering, geologists and archeologists. Further, the 'Shivling' found from the Gyanoday Tirth, which the Muslim side termed as the "wazukhana", should also be examined to ascertain whether it is a 'Shivling' or a fountain, they had said. (Only the headline and picture of this report may have been reworked by the Business Standard staff; the rest of the content is auto-generated from a syndicated feed.)First Published: Oct 10 2024 | 6:22 PM IST [ad_2] Source link

[amn-group]

Gyanvapi case update: Supreme Court rejects mosque side’s petition.

[legalupanishad]

Gyanvapi Mosque Committee Challenges Varanasi Court's ASI Survey Order

This article on 'Gyanvapi Mosque Committee Challenges Varanasi Court's ASI Survey Order' was written by Anukriti Prakash, an intern at Legal Upanishad.

INTRODUCTION

The Gyanvapi Mosque-Kashi Vishwanath Temple dispute is one of India's longest-running religious conflicts. The issue is focused on who owns the land on which the Gyanvapi Mosque exists, with Hindu parties saying that the mosque was constructed on the site of an old Kashi Vishwanath Temple that Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb demolished. The controversy has been the subject of multiple legal disputes, and a recent Varanasi court ruling for an ASI assessment of the site has re-ignited the debate. The Gyanvapi mosque committee has now filed an appeal with the Allahabad High Court, claiming that the survey will breach the mosque's status as a protected monument. The dispute revived an argument in India about religious tolerance and the preservation of cultural heritage. This article is an attempt to analyse the facts, issues and the recent happening in this dispute.

BRIEF FACTS

The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, which is responsible for managing 22 mosques including the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi, has submitted a petition to the Allahabad High Court. The petition challenges the District Court's verdict of July 21, which ordered an ASI survey of the Mosque Premises (except for Wuzukhana). The Supreme Court ordered that the Varanasi Court's ruling should not be implemented until 5 p.m. on July 26 in order to give the Masjid committee some "breathing time" to seek the High Court. The plea was submitted the next day. A bench consisting of Chief Justice of India D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice J.B. Pardiwala, and Justice Manoj Misra issued the Supreme Court's ruling on July 24. Before its temporary injunction expires on July 26, the ruling asked the High Court Chief Justice to permit a hearing on Masjid's plea. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) notified the three-judge bench during the hearing that it does not plan to conduct any excavations at the Gyanvapi site for at least a week. In contrast, the Varanasi District Court authorized excavation to determine if the 16th-century mosque was constructed on an earlier temple.

CONTENTIONS OF BOTH THE PARTIES

The Hindu groups contend that the old Kashi Vishwanath Temple, which Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb demolished, was located where the Gyanvapi Mosque is now located. They contend that the mosque ought to be taken down and the temple restored. To support this assertion, they have referred to several kinds of historical and archaeological sources and documents. On the other hand, the mosque committee argues that the mosque is a protected monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958. They argue that the ASI survey would violate the mosque's status as a protected monument and that the survey could damage the mosque's structure. The Varanasi court ordered the ASI survey of the site to determine the truth behind the claims made by the Hindu groups. The mosque committee has challenged this order in the Allahabad High Court, arguing that the survey would violate the mosque's status as a protected monument. The case is still ongoing, and it remains to be seen what the final decision will be.

RECENT EVENTS OF THE GYANVAPI MOSQUE CASE

The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, which is responsible for managing the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi, moved to the Allahabad High Court to challenge a District Court's verdict that ordered an ASI survey of the mosque premises (except for Wuzukhana). The committee's contention that the District Court's ruling was made without taking into account the mosque's status as a protected monument under the 1958 Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act forms the basis of its petition. The committee has further argued that the District Court lacked the authority to issue such an order. Additionally, the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee has claimed that the District Court's ruling infringes on their basic right of religion to practice and promote their belief under Article 25 of the Constitution. The committee claims that the ASI survey would violate their right to free exercise of religion and harm the mosque beyond restoration. The committee has also argued that the District Court's order is based on a misinterpretation of the Archaeological Survey of India Act, 1958, and that the District Court had no power to order an ASI survey of the mosque. The Allahabad High Court is currently hearing the case, and the next hearing is scheduled for July 27.

CONCLUSION

The Gyanvapi Mosque dispute has been ongoing for several years. The recent developments in the case have led to a lot of controversy and unrest. The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee's plea in the Allahabad High Court challenges the Varanasi Court's order for an ASI survey of the mosque premises. The committee claims that the poll would violate their right to free exercise of religion and harm the mosque beyond repair. The Allahabad High Court is now hearing the matter, and the next hearing has been scheduled for July 27. The outcome of this case will have far-reaching implications for the country.

REFERENCES

Apurva Vishwanath, "Gyanvapi Mosque case: what the Varanasi court said", Indian Express, 15 September 2022, available at: https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/gyanvapi-mosque-case-what-the-varanasi-court-said-8147303/ (Last Visited: 25 July 2023). “Mosque Committee moves Allahabad HC against Gyanvapi Masjid Survey Order”, DT next, 25 July 2023, available at: https://www.dtnext.in/news/national/mosque-committee-moves-allahabad-hc-against-gyanvapi-masjid-survey-order-726242?infinitescroll=1 (Last Visited: 26 July 2023). “Gyanvapi: ‘ASI survey will create some upheaval in country’: Mosque Committee argues in High Court challenging Varanasi court order”, Live Law, 25 July 2023, available at: https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/allahabad-high-court/allahabad-high-court-gyanvapi-asi-survey-upheaval-country-mosque-committee-argues-varanasi-court-233601#:~:text=ChallengingtheVaranasiCourt’sorder,someupheavalinthecountry. (Last Visited: 26 July 2023). Read the full article

[all-about-news24x7]

Allahabad HC on Gyanvapi case

On 31st May 2023, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the revision petition of the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee in connection with the Gyanvapi case of Varanasi. The Anjuman Intezamia had challenged the maintainability of a plea by five Hindu women worshippers filed in Varanasi Court seeking the right to worship inside the Gyanvapi complex in Varanasi. The Varanasi District Court is hearing…

[gadgetsforusesblog]

Ruling on petition in connection with hearing 7 case on 27 March ntc

A new date has again been set for the decision on the petition to hear 7 cases related to Gyanvapi together. The district judge of Varanasi will rule on the case on Monday, March 27. Actually, District Judge Ajay Krishna Vishwesh in Varanasi had made the decision in the transfer application in the past, but even after the passing of several dates, the decision is not given. Now the date of the…

[newsyatra]

Court Will Give Order Today On Monitoring Petition Filed In Gyanvapi Case - ज्ञानवापी प्रकरण में दाखिल निगरानी याचिका पर अदालत आज सुनाएगी आदेश

Court Will Give Order Today On Monitoring Petition Filed In Gyanvapi Case – ज्ञानवापी प्रकरण में दाखिल निगरानी याचिका पर अदालत आज सुनाएगी आदेश

[ad_1]

न्यूज डेस्��, अमर उजाला, वाराणसी

Updated Thu, 22 Oct 2020 12:03 AM IST

प्रतीकात्मक तस्वीर – फोटो : सोशल मीडिया

पढ़ें अमर उजाला ई-पेपर कहीं भी, कभी भी।

*Yearly subscription for just ₹299 Limited Period Offer. HURRY UP!

ख़बर सुनें

ख़बर सुनें

प्राचीन मूर्ति स्वयंभू ज्योतिर्लिंग…

[marketingstrategy1]

Gyanvapi:ज्ञानवापी मामले में निगरानी याचिका पर सुनवाई टली, अब 18 जनवरी को होगी सुनवाई - Hearing On Monitoring Petition In Gyanvapi Case Postponed Now Hearing Will Be Held On 18 January

Gyanvapi:ज्ञानवापी मामले में निगरानी याचिका पर सुनवाई टली, अब 18 जनवरी को होगी सुनवाई – Hearing On Monitoring Petition In Gyanvapi Case Postponed Now Hearing Will Be Held On 18 January

वाराणसी कोर्ट – फोटो : अमर उजाला ख़बर सुनें ख़बर सुनें ज्ञानवापी आदि विश्वेश्वर वाद प्रकरण में सिविल जज फास्ट ट्रैक कोर्ट सीनियर डिविजन के आदेश के खिलाफ अंजुमन की तरफ से दाखिल निगरानी याचिका पर बुधवार को सुनवाई टल गई। जिला जज डॉ. अजय कृष्ण विश्वेश की अदालत में होनी थी। अब मामले में सुनवाई 18 जनवरी को होगी।  अंजुमन इंतजामिया मसाजिद कमेटी की ओर से पिछले दिनों लोअर कोर्ट के आदेश के खिलाफ सत्र…

[rickztalk]

Krishna Janmabhoomi case: Mathura court orders Gyanvapi Masjid-like survey of Shahi Idgah mosque | India News

Krishna Janmabhoomi case: Mathura court orders Gyanvapi Masjid-like survey of Shahi Idgah mosque | India News

Mathura (Uttar Pradesh): Mathura local court on Saturday passed an order in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah case to survey the disputed site. The Court of Senior Division, while hearing the petition of Hindu Sena, issued an order to survey the disputed site. Issuing notices to all the parties, saying they have been asked to comply with the court`s order. The survey report is to be presented…

[newslobster]

Gyanvapi Case: UP Court To Hear Plea For Prayers At 'Shivling' At Mosque

Gyanvapi Case: UP Court To Hear Plea For Prayers At ‘Shivling’ At Mosque

Lucknow: A petition seeking that prayers be allowed to the “Shivaling” found inside Varanasi’s Gyanvapi mosque complex, will be heard by a local court. The petition has also sought that Muslims be banned from the Gyanvapi mosque complex and it be handed over to Hindus. A fast-track court, in its order on the matter today, has said that the petition is “maintainable”. Another court in Varanasi is…

[squarwell-breakingnews]

High Court To Hear Plea Challenging Verdict In Gyanvapi Case On Wednesday

High Court To Hear Plea Challenging Verdict In Gyanvapi Case On Wednesday

The mosque committee has now filed a revision petition in the high court. (File) Prayagraj, UP: The Allahabad High Court will hear on Wednesday the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee’s petition challenging the Varanasi district court’s September 12 order rejecting its application against the maintainability of a plea seeking daily worship of Hindu deities whose idols are located on an outer wall…