Gyanvapi Mosque case: Varanasi court to hear Muslim side's plea on May 26

"The court has made it clear that it will hear the case on Order 7 Rule 11 on May 26. As per the court's order, a copy of the videography and photography will be made available. All the pending petitions will be heard on the same day," Advocate Madan Mohan Yadav told media persons.

The district court on Monday completed the hearing of arguments in the case and reserved its order for today.

Advocate Madan Mohan Yadav, representing the Hindu side, on Tuesday, said that the Muslim side wanted the case dismissed.

Speaking to ANI, he said, "Muslim side presented their arguments yesterday, they said that the matter doesn't meet the parameters of the Places of Worship Act. They wanted the matter dismissed. But we too presented our arguments before the Court."

The hearing began in Varanasi court after the Supreme Court said it would not interfere with the Gyanvapi mosque survey and transferred the case to the lower court while noting the "complexities and sensitivities involved in the matter" would require a "more senior and experienced hand".

The bench said the District Judge should decide the maintainability of the civil suit in the case on priority as sought by Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Varanasi.

After the survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque complex in Varanasi concluded, lawyers representing Hindu petitioners claimed that a Shivling was found in the Gyanvapi mosque-Shringar Gauri complex.

The claim was disputed by the mosque committee members who said it was part of the water fountain in the wazoo khana. On May 16, the Varanasi court ordered the sealing of part of the mosque.

The Supreme Court ordered the Varanasi district magistrate to ensure the area where a shivling was purportedly found is protected without obstructing the Muslim community's right to worship.

The Court had appointed an official and a team of lawyers to conduct an inspection at Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi in connection with a plea seeking access to a Hindu temple behind it.

A lawyer had also filed an intervention application in the Supreme Court seeking impleadment in the Gyanvapi mosque case stating that a mosque constructed on temple land cannot be a mosque.

The application was filed by advocate Ashwini Upadhyay who had earlier filed a petition challenging the Constitutional validity of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 (Act).

Five Hindu women have sought round-the-year access to pray at "a shrine behind the western wall of the mosque complex". The site is currently made open for Hindu prayers once a year. (ANI)