Gyanvapi Masjid Case: Varanasi court to deliver verdict on plea seeking worship rights of 'Shivling' found on mosque premise

Shailendra Kumar Pathak and Jainendra Kumar Pathak applied for inclusion in the pending revision petition against the Archaeological Survey's order through advocate Deshratna Srivastava

Image Credit: File Photo; Representational purpose only

Gyanvapi Masjid Case was heard in Varanasi's Civil Fast Track Court. Following the hearing on November 14, Civil Judge Senior Division Mahendra Kumar Pandey postponed the decision for two days that is on November 17, 2022. Now, in this case, the court will decide today whether or not the case is fit for hearing. Kiran Singh "Bisen," the wife of Vishwa Vedic Sanatan Sangh chief Jitendra Singh Bisen, had petitioned the court. Both sides' arguments have been concluded. The decision was postponed for two days by Civil Judge Mahendra Kumar Pandey, who cited the backlog of cases

On Monday, around 2 p.m., the International General Secretary of Vishwa Vedic Sanatan Sangh, Kiran Singh, filed an application in court. In this regard, a demand was made in the court of Civil Judge Fast Track Court Senior Division Mahendra Kumar Pandey to hand over the Gyanvapi campus to Hindus, describing it as a temple and inviting them to worship the Shivling found there. Previously, there was a demand to reject it while raising objections from the Muslim side. Although, in the past, both sides have made sufficient arguments in court during the hearing of this case. In such a case, the court is now expected to rule on the case's maintainability (whether the case is hearable or not). As mentioned in an article by Dainik Jagran. 

On the other hand, the monitoring petition filed in the case of an archaeological survey in the Gyanvapi mosque complex was also heard on Monday afternoon. In this regard, in the court of District Judge Dr Ajay Krishna Vishwesh, a certified copy of the order given on maintainability (whether the case is hearable or not) in the Shringar Gauri case has been filed on behalf of litigant Vijay Shankar Rastogi in the court. In view of the order from the court in this case also, there has been an atmosphere of commotion in the court since morning including preparations from both sides. 

On the other hand, Shailendra Kumar Pathak and Jainendra Kumar Pathak gave an application through advocate Deshratna Srivastava to be made a party in the pending revision petition against the order of the Archaeological Survey, which is being heard in the District Judge's court. After hearing the arguments of the parties on this application, the District Judge fixed the date of December 7 for an advance hearing and decision.

(With agencies inputs)