Asia Press Agency

Tag: Gyanvapi mosque

  • Tensions Rise Over Hindu Prayers in Gyanvapi Mosque

    Tensions Rise Over Hindu Prayers in Gyanvapi Mosque

    A wave of tension grips the Gyanvapi Mosque premises as Trinamool Congress (TMC) leader Siddiqullah Chowdhury issues a stern warning to Hindu worshippers to vacate immediately. Speaking at a Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind rally in Kolkata, Chowdhury’s remarks escalate the ongoing dispute over Hindu prayers being conducted in the southern cellar of the mosque.

     

    Chowdhury’s statement, as reported by India Today, includes a warning directed at Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, indicating that if Adityanath were to visit West Bengal, he would be prevented from leaving. The TMC leader’s call for the evacuation of Hindu worshippers is met with heightened tensions amid allegations of religious encroachment.

     

    Expressing his dismay, Chowdhury questions the legitimacy of Hindu prayers within the mosque’s confines. “Why are they coming to worship in our mosques? We don’t go to any temple for prayer,” he asserts, emphasizing the sanctity of the Gyanvapi Mosque, which has stood for over 800 years. He vehemently opposes any attempts to convert the mosque into a temple, rallying against what he perceives as an infringement on religious freedom.

     

    The controversy surrounding the Gyanvapi Mosque exacerbates as the Muslim side alleges collusion between the state government and Hindu parties involved in the case. Senior Advocate SFA Naqvi, representing the Muslim side, raises concerns during the hearing at the Allahabad High Court regarding the presence of the advocate general. Naqvi questions the advocate general’s role, insinuating potential ties between the plaintiff and the state.

     

    In response, Justice Rohit Ranjan Agarwal asserts that the advocate general was merely providing assistance, yet the presence of the state government in the proceedings remains contentious. The Allahabad High Court adjourns the hearing to February 12 amidst mounting tensions and accusations surrounding the legal proceedings.

     

    The underlying dispute revolves around a plea challenging the Varanasi district court’s decision permitting Hindu prayers in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi Mosque. The district court’s ruling granted access for Hindu worshippers to conduct prayers before the idols within the mosque premises, sparking outrage and division within the community.

     

    As the legal battle unfolds, religious sensitivities and political affiliations converge, fueling unrest and apprehension. The Gyanvapi Mosque dispute serves as a poignant reminder of the delicate balance between religious freedoms and communal harmony, underscoring the need for judicious resolution and dialogue amidst polarizing circumstances.

  • AIMPLB Condemns Hasty Decision Related at Gyanvapi Mosque

    AIMPLB Condemns Hasty Decision Related at Gyanvapi Mosque

    The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) has strongly criticized the recent decision by the Varanasi district court, allowing Hindu prayers in a cellar of the Gyanvapi Mosque, deeming it a hasty judgment that raised concerns about possible collusion.

     

    AIMPLB President Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani expressed the organization’s deep concern, stating that the decision to allow puja at the mosque was taken hastily without giving the Muslim side a chance to present detailed arguments. He mentioned that the incident has not only pained Muslims but also people of other religions who believe in secularism.

     

    Rahmani clarified that the notion of a temple being demolished to build a mosque is incorrect, emphasizing that Islam does not permit taking someone’s land to construct a mosque. He cited the Babri Masjid decision, where it was acknowledged that the temple was not brought down to build a mosque, yet the ruling favored the other side based on ‘aastha’ (faith). He urged courts to make decisions based on facts rather than faith.

     

    In a statement issued by AIMPLB, the organization expressed regret and concern over the abrupt initiation of puja in the Gyanvapi Mosque’s cellar. The overnight breaking of iron grills and placement of idols, despite a seven-day window granted by the court, raised questions about potential collusion between the administration and the plaintiff, attempting to preclude efforts by the Mosque Managing Committee.

     

    The statement further conveyed deep surprise and disappointment at the Varanasi District Judge’s judgment, considering it relied on a highly incorrect argument about the worship history in the mosque’s basement. AIMPLB criticized the decision and emphasized the need to implement the Places of Worship Act, 1991, in its letter and spirit to prevent disputes in the country.

     

    The AIMPLB’s stance underscores the importance of fair and impartial judgments that consider the facts and uphold the principles of justice, aiming to maintain communal harmony and respect for places of worship. The organization calls for a more measured and inclusive approach to address such sensitive matters, emphasizing adherence to established laws to prevent conflicts.

  • Varanasi Court Grants Hindu Side Permission to Offer Prayers

    Varanasi Court Grants Hindu Side Permission to Offer Prayers

    The Varanasi district court has granted permission to the Hindu side to offer prayers at the southern cellar, also known as ‘Vyas Ka Tehkhana,’ inside the Gyanvapi mosque. The court’s decision comes after a plea by four Hindu women to the Supreme Court requesting the excavation and scientific survey of a sealed portion of the Gyanvapi mosque. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report, which concluded that a significant Hindu temple structure predated the mosque’s construction, played a crucial role in the court’s decision.

     

    Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing the Hindu side, stated, “…Puja will start within seven days. Everyone will have the right to perform Puja.” The court ordered the district magistrate to make arrangements for prayers within seven days and involve a priest nominated by the Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple Trust. However, the Muslim side, represented by the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee, has expressed its intention to challenge the order in a higher court.

     

    The Varanasi court’s decision has triggered mixed reactions, with the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) rejecting the ASI findings. The AIMPLB emphasized that the ASI’s report is not “conclusive evidence” and accused Hindu communal organizations of misleading the public.

     

    The ASI report, based on a comprehensive study of existing structures, artifacts, and inscriptions at the Gyanvapi site, concluded that there existed a large Hindu temple before the construction of the existing mosque in the 17th century. The report highlighted features such as the western wall of the mosque being part of an earlier Hindu temple, reused pillars and pilasters from the pre-existing temple in the present structure, and Sanskrit and Dravidian inscriptions dating from the 12th to 17th century.

     

    The court’s decision to allow Hindu prayers at a specific area within the Gyanvapi mosque complex adds another chapter to the historical and religious complexities surrounding the site. The Gyanvapi mosque, located near the Kashi Vishwanath Temple, has been a subject of historical disputes, with claims and counterclaims by different religious communities over the centuries.

     

    While the Varanasi court’s decision addresses a specific aspect related to prayers in the mosque complex, the broader issues of religious harmony, coexistence, and legal disputes over historical sites persist. The court’s order reflects the delicate balance that judicial authorities aim to maintain in addressing the concerns and sentiments of different religious communities while upholding the principles of law and justice.

     

    As the legal proceedings continue, the Gyanvapi mosque case remains a symbol of the intricate interplay between history, archaeology, religious beliefs, and legal interpretations. The site holds immense cultural and religious significance for both Hindus and Muslims, and any legal resolution must navigate through these complexities to ensure a fair and just outcome. The challenges posed by such cases highlight the need for a nuanced approach that respects diversity, historical facts, and the principles of justice in addressing disputes related to religious sites.

  • Gyanvapi Mosque Controversy: ASI Survey Report Reveals Insights

    Gyanvapi Mosque Controversy: ASI Survey Report Reveals Insights

    In a significant development in the Gyanvapi mosque complex dispute in Varanasi, the district court has decided to provide both litigants with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) survey report. This move comes as the latest chapter in a long-standing legal battle between Hindu and Muslim communities over the ownership and history of the religious site.

     

    Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, representing the Hindu side, expressed confidence in the conclusive findings of the ASI survey. According to Jain, the survey affirms the presence of a substantial Hindu temple that predates the construction of the existing structure at the Gyanvapi mosque complex.

     

    The ASI report, as disclosed by ANI, unveils intriguing insights into the historical structures within the complex. It suggests that a pre-existing structure appeared to have been dismantled in the 17th century, with a part of it modified and reused. The scientific studies referenced in the report indicate the existence of a large Hindu temple before the construction of the current mosque.

     

    Moreover, the report notes an Arabic-Persian inscription inside a room, dating the mosque’s construction to the 20th regnal year of Aurangzeb (1676-77 CE). This revelation leads to the conclusion that the pre-existing structure was likely destroyed during the reign of Aurangzeb, and part of it was modified and reused in the current mosque.

     

    The Varanasi court, under the jurisdiction of District Judge A K Vishvesh, has ruled that the ASI survey report will be made accessible to both the Hindu and Muslim parties involved in the dispute. This decision is a crucial step in ensuring transparency and providing all concerned parties with the opportunity to examine the archaeological findings.

     

    The ASI report also emphasizes that the western wall of the current structure represents the remaining section of a ‘pre-existing Hindu temple.’ Elements of the pre-existing temple, such as pillars and pilasters, were repurposed with minor alterations during the expansion of the mosque and the creation of the ‘sahan.’

     

    In the eastern section of the mosque, cellars were constructed to expand the available space, and a sizable platform was created to accommodate large congregations for prayers. The report details how pillars from previous temples were repurposed during the construction of cellars in the eastern part of the platform.

     

    One notable discovery mentioned in the report is a pillar adorned with bells, niches for placing lamps on all sides, and featuring an inscription from Samvat 1669. This pillar was reused in cellar N2. Additionally, the report highlights the discovery of sculptures depicting Hindu deities and carved architectural elements buried beneath the deposited soil in cellar S2.

     

    A total of 34 inscriptions were recorded during the survey, featuring scripts such as Devanagari, Grantha, Telugu, and Kannada. These inscriptions are on the stones of the pre-existing Hindu temples, which were re-used during the construction or repair of the existing mosque.

     

    This development comes after the Supreme Court approved a request from Hindu women petitioners to cleanse the entire ‘wazukhana’ area within the Gyanvapi mosque. This area, where an alleged ‘Shivling’ was discovered, became a focal point in the legal proceedings.

     

    The Gyanvapi mosque complex dispute has a long history, with both Hindu and Muslim communities asserting their claims over the religious site. The ASI survey report, with its archaeological findings, adds a new dimension to the ongoing legal and religious discussions surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi. As the court proceedings continue, the revelations from the ASI report will likely influence the narratives presented by both sides in this complex and sensitive dispute.

  • Fragmented Idols Discovered in ASI Survey at Gyanvapi Complex

    Fragmented Idols Discovered in ASI Survey at Gyanvapi Complex

    During the ongoing survey conducted by the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) at the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi, lawyer Sudhir Tripathi, representing the Hindu side, revealed that they have discovered remains of fragmented idols amidst the debris.

     

    The survey, which aimed to ascertain whether the 17th-century masjid was built over a pre-existing Hindu temple structure, has been the subject of attention and debate. The ASI team focused its efforts on the wuzu khana (ablution area) and the prayer space for Muslims. The survey resumed on Saturday, following a brief pause around noon to permit Muslims to pray in the mosque.

     

    During the survey, the ASI team documented the layout and captured images of structures within the Gyanvapi mosque complex. The survey’s primary objective is to provide a comprehensive report on its findings, and the ASI has been directed by the Varanasi court to submit the survey report by September 2.

     

    The Supreme Court declined to issue a stay on the Allahabad High Court’s order regarding the ASI survey of the Gyanvapi mosque. The Muslim side, however, expressed concerns that the survey might “reopen wounds of the past.” The apex court instructed the ASI team not to use any invasive methods during the survey.

     

    Lawyer Subhash Nandan Chaturvedi, representing the Hindu side, stated that the ASI team is conducting the survey in the central dome of the mosque complex, with imaging and mapping underway. The team has also entered the ‘tehkhana’ (basement), which is under the possession of the Vyas family.

     

    The masjid committee initially boycotted the survey but later agreed to cooperate following the Supreme Court’s decision. The Muslim side’s apprehension is that the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) might manipulate the ASI report’s narrative and bring other issues like the Babri masjid to the fore.

     

    As the survey progresses, more discoveries may shed light on the historical and religious significance of the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi.

  • SC: Challenge to Archaeological Survey of Gyanvapi Mosque

    SC: Challenge to Archaeological Survey of Gyanvapi Mosque

    The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear a plea from the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee challenging the Allahabad High Court’s order that allows the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi mosque premises.

     

    The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, which manages the Gyanvapi mosque, moved the Supreme Court on Thursday to challenge the Allahabad High Court’s order. The Muslim body’s advocate has sought an urgent hearing before a bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud and has urged the bench to halt the ASI from conducting the survey.

     

    On Thursday, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the plea of the Muslim party against the Varanasi court’s order, with Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker emphasizing the importance of the survey for the sake of justice.

     

    Following the High Court’s judgement, a Caveat application was filed in the Supreme Court by one of the Hindu petitioners in the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque case, seeking to be heard before any order is passed in case the Muslim side files a plea against the Allahabad High Court’s decision to allow the ASI to conduct the scientific survey of the mosque premises.

     

    A Caveat application is filed by a litigant to ensure that no adverse order is passed against them without being heard. Previously, on July 24, the Supreme Court had put a hold on the Archaeological Survey of India’s detailed scientific survey until July 26 to determine whether the mosque, located next to the Kashi Vishwanath temple in Varanasi, was built upon a temple.

     

    The order for the ASI survey of the Gyanvapi complex was given by Varanasi district judge AK Vishvesha on July 21, in response to an application moved by four Hindu women on May 16. However, the district judge’s order excluded the ablution pond area of the complex, which has been sealed as per the top court’s direction.

  • ASI Permitted for Survey of Gyanvapi Mosque Complex

    ASI Permitted for Survey of Gyanvapi Mosque Complex

    In a significant development, the Allahabad High Court has granted permission to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a comprehensive survey of the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi. The survey aims to shed light on the historical origins of the site and address the contentious claim that the mosque was built by demolishing the Kashi Vishwanath temple.

     

    Representing the Hindu side in the Gyanvapi survey case, Vishnu Shankar Jain expressed his satisfaction with the court’s decision, stating that the Allahabad HC upheld the Sessions court order allowing the ASI survey to proceed. The survey will assess the Gyanvapi mosque complex, excluding the Wazukhana that houses a structure claimed to be a Shivling.

     

    The Uttar Pradesh Deputy Chief Minister, Keshav Prasad Maurya, welcomed the verdict, expressing confidence that the truth would emerge after the ASI survey, and the Gyanvapi issue would be resolved. However, the survey was initially put on hold by the Allahabad High Court upon the ongoing hearing of the matter after the Supreme Court issued an order to suspend the survey until July 26, 5 pm.

     

    The Gyanvapi mosque case has seen several legal twists. The Supreme Court previously rectified an order in relation to the case, inadvertently disposing of an appeal by a committee questioning the maintainability of a suit by Hindus seeking worship rights inside the mosque.

     

    The controversy surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque came to the forefront when a structure, claimed to be a Shivling by the Hindu side and a fountain by the Muslim side, was found within the mosque premises during a court-mandated survey on May 16 last year. This led to a demand for a scientific survey and carbon dating of the purported Shivling.

     

    On May 12, 2022, the Allahabad High Court allowed the scientific survey of the Shivling, but the Supreme Court stayed this order on May 19, 2022. The High Court had earlier set aside a Varanasi District judge’s order rejecting the application for the scientific survey and carbon dating of the Shivling.

     

    The ASI survey holds significant importance as it aims to provide an objective assessment of the Gyanvapi mosque complex’s historical heritage. By addressing the contentious claims and offering an unbiased evaluation, it is hoped that the survey will pave the way for a fair resolution to the longstanding dispute surrounding the site.

  • Gyanvapi Mosque Case, Extends ASI Survey Stay

    Gyanvapi Mosque Case, Extends ASI Survey Stay

    The recent developments surrounding the Gyanvapi Mosque case have caught the attention of the nation. The Allahabad High Court, in a significant decision, extended the stay order on the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) survey at the Gyanvapi Mosque until Thursday, 27th July. The court will reconvene to continue hearing the plea against the ASI survey of the mosque premises at 3:30 PM on the specified date.

     

    The legal saga began on 21st July when a Varanasi court issued a directive to the ASI to conduct a thorough survey, including excavations if necessary, to determine whether the mosque was constructed on the site of a former temple. This decision sparked widespread interest and debates, given the religious and historical significance of the site.

     

    In an unusual twist, the Supreme Court unexpectedly revived a Gyanvapi panel plea on 24th July, which was inadvertently disposed of earlier. The Supreme Court had previously stayed the ASI survey until 26th July, 5 PM, to allow the Masjid committee adequate time to approach the High Court. However, the revived plea reignited the discussions surrounding the case.

     

    The Gyanvapi Mosque committee expressed concerns about the potential structural damage that could result from the excavation process. The court questioned their level of trust in the judicial process when they appeared skeptical about the ASI’s assurances that no harm would be inflicted on the historical monument.

     

    In response to the Varanasi Court’s order, the Anjuman Mosque Committee took the matter to the Allahabad High Court. Their challenge focused on the Varanasi Court’s decision to survey the mosque premises, excluding the wuzukhana, an area designated for ablution.

     

    During the hearing, the Allahabad High Court voiced doubts about the ASI’s proposed survey methodology. The ASGI, representing the ASI, struggled to provide a clear and convincing explanation, which further intensified the court’s skepticism.

     

    Although the ASGI clarified that the Ground-penetrating radar (GPR) method would be utilized, following the Varanasi Court’s instructions to prevent damage to the structure, the High Court remained uncertain about the intended approach.

     

    The developments surrounding the Gyanvapi Mosque case continue to intrigue the nation, and all eyes are on the upcoming hearing as it may determine the course of future actions in this highly sensitive and significant legal matter.

  • Gyanvapi Mosque to Undergo Scientific Survey by ASI

    Gyanvapi Mosque to Undergo Scientific Survey by ASI

    The recent order by the Varanasi court for a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi mosque has sparked both celebration and controversy. Situated right next to the revered Kashi Vishwanath temple, the mosque has been a subject of contention between the Hindu and Muslim communities, with the former claiming that the mosque was built on the site of an ancient Hindu temple.

     

    The court’s decision came in response to a petition filed by a group of Hindu devotees seeking a thorough investigation to establish the historical truth about the origins of the Gyanvapi mosque. The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has been entrusted with the task of conducting the survey, which is anticipated to shed light on the longstanding dispute.

     

    However, it is important to note that the ‘wazukhana,’ an area within the mosque premises where Hindu devotees claim the presence of a ‘shivling,’ will not be included in the survey. This exclusion is due to the fact that the matter concerning the ‘wazukhana’ is currently being handled by the Supreme Court.

     

    Vishnu Shankar Jain, the legal representative of the Hindu side, expressed optimism about the survey’s potential to resolve the dispute once and for all. He stated that the survey is estimated to be completed within a span of three to six months, bringing hope for a definitive conclusion to the protracted issue.

     

    The petition that led to the court order was initially filed by five women seeking permission to offer prayers at the “Shringar Gauri Sthal” located within the mosque complex. During the process, a unique structure was discovered on the mosque premises, with some believers considering it to be a “Shivling” on one side and a “fountain” on the other. This discovery further fueled the demand for an in-depth investigation.

     

    On the contrary, the Muslim side has expressed concerns about potential damage to the Gyanvapi complex due to the ASI survey. They contend that the survey could adversely impact the structure’s integrity and historical significance.

     

    The Varanasi court heard arguments from both sides on July 14 and reserved its order after the proceedings. As the legal battle continues, the ASI’s survey holds the promise of unravelling the mysteries surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque and could pave the way for a resolution that respects the sentiments of all parties involved.