Thu. Oct 6th, 2022

VARANASI: Four women petitioners in the Gyanvapi The Mosque-Shringar Gauri case filed an application in the Varanasi district judge’s court on Thursday, seeking scientific investigation and carbon dating to determine the nature, age and components of the “shivling” found during the inspection of the defense commissioner of the mosque on May 16.
Previously, they had moved the Supreme Court with the same allegation and were ordered by him to take the matter to the court of first instance in Varanasi. The petition was filed through his advocates Hari Shankar Jain and jain vishnu.
Giving details of the matter, Vishnu Jain said: “In the application filed in the Supreme Court on July 17, petitioners number 2 to 5, Laxmi Devi, Sita Sahu, Manju Vyas and Rekha Pathak, in the case Rakhi Singh v. UP and others had sought a ground-penetrating radar (GPR) study and carbon dating of the “shivling” found in the mosque’s ablution pool and permission to worship the deity.”
“The SC ordered us to take the case to the court of first instance, where the initial case is heard. Therefore, we filed our application with the district judge’s court in Varanasi on Thursday. The next hearing in the matter will be held on September 29,” he told TOI.
He said the exact age and dimensions of the discovered “shivling” could be determined only after its GPR study and carbon dating by or under the supervision of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). “The GPR survey is imperative to uncovering the nature of the construction beneath the ‘shivling’ discovered on May 16,” she said.
He added: “Scientific research using carbon dating will allow the age, nature and other components of the ‘shivling’ to be determined.”
Lawyers for Anjuman Intezamia Masajid (AIM), Gyanvapi Mosque Management Committee, Rayis Ahmed and Merajuddin Siddaqi declined to comment on the request.
“We will talk about that only after reviewing the details of the application filed by the plaintiffs regarding GPR or carbon dating,” they said.
In Rakhi Singh v. State of UP et al, in which five female plaintiffs seek daily worship of the goddess. Shringar Gauri and other deities in the mosque premises, the court of civil judge (higher division) Ravi Kumar Diwakar ordered on April 8, 2022, that the judicial commission inspect the Gyanvapi Mosque. The survey was carried out between May 6 and 16 and on the last day, lawyers from the Hindu side claimed to have discovered a “shivling” in the mosque’s ablution pool.
Before the commission’s report could be presented to the court on May 19, AIM moved to the high court, which transferred the civil suit to the district judge requesting to finalize the maintainability issue.
The CS also dealt with the situation that arose immediately after the discovery of the “shivling” and ordered the protection of the area in question while asking the Muslims to perform ‘wuzu’ (ablution) in a different place to offer namaz in the pre. -designated place inside the mosque.
Before the district judge’s court ruled on the tenability of the case on September 12, the female plaintiffs went to the high court demanding a GPR study and carbon dating of the “shivling”.
No temple was demolished to build a mosque: AIM to court
Anjuman Intezamia Masajid, the Gyanvapi Mosque management committee, on Thursday filed its response in the case in which five female plaintiffs applied for the right to worship Shringar Gauri and other deities at the Gyanvapi Mosque complex, alleging that no temple was demolished to build the current structure. . “The mosque and the temple exist in their original places,” the AIM stated.
The response was filed after hearing on the matter resumed Thursday in the district judge’s court. The court set September 29 for the next hearing in the case.
Furthermore, of the 16 applications seeking to become a party in the case, seven were rejected by District Judge Ajay Krishna Vishvesha as “not pushed”, while one was withdrawn.
Following the district judge’s order on September 12 that the case was tenable, his regular hearing began on Thursday. AIM’s attorneys, Merajuddin Siddaqi and Rayis Ahmed, filed their response against the points raised in the women’s plaintiffs’ lawsuit.
Ahmed said: “The response against most points in the plaintiffs’ lawsuit is the same. It has already been argued before the court questioning the maintainability of the case.”
“We have made it clear that no temple was demolished for the construction of the mosque. The mosque and the temple exist in their original places. If one of the 12 Jyotirlingas existed in the Kashi Vishwanath temple, how could two Jyotirlingas be claimed elsewhere when raising the question of the old temple and the new temple, Ahmed said, citing the points raised in the reply.
Regarding their request to ask the court for eight weeks to start any further proceedings, the duo said, “While transferring the case to the district judge’s court on May 20, the Supreme Court mentioned that the aggrieved party in the case could go to a higher court. In view of this, we had looked for time. The matter was discussed in court but his order is awaited.”

Read More: Plea in Varanasi court seeks carbon dating of ‘shivling’ found on Gyanvapi premises | India News