The batch of civil suits pending before the Varanasi court, seeking right to worship in the Gyanvapi mosque and the restoration of the temple at the site, are “not barred by the Places of Worship Act of 1991”, said the Allahabad High Court on Monday. The court also noted that the Gyanvapi premises can either have a Hindu religious character or a Muslim religious character, but can’t have dual character.
The observations were made by the Bench of Justice Rohit Ranjan Agrawal, while rejecting a plea filed by Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee, which manages the Gyanvapi mosque. The committee had challenged the suits filed by the Hindu petitioners by claiming that such suits are prohibited by the Places of Worship Act (Special Provisions) Act, 1991
The Hindu petitioners have claimed that part of an old temple of Lord Vishweshwar lies at the centre of the Gyanvapi compound. They have also pleaded that the disputed site is an abode of “Swayambhu Lord Vishweshwar” and cannot be a building of another faith.
The court on Tuesday maintained that the dispute raised in the suit is of “national importance” and affects two major communities of the country.
“In view of the discussions.... I come to the conclusion that the present suit filed by plaintiffs being Suit No. 610 of 1991 is not barred by provisions of Section 4 of Act of 1991, and the plaint cannot be rejected under Order 7 Rule 11 C.P.C,” the court noted.
Also Read | Incremental injustice: On the Gyanvapi mosque survey
The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 prohibits the “conversion of a religious structure from its nature as it stood on the date of Independence”, i.e., August 15, 1947.
The court said the Act does not define “religious character” and only “conversion” and “place of worship” have been defined.
“I find that religious character of the disputed place as it existed on 15.08.1947 is to be determined by documentary as well as oral evidence led by both the parties. Unless and until the court adjudicates, the disputed place of worship cannot be called as a temple or mosque... Either the Gyanvapi Compound has a Hindu religious character or a Muslim religious character. It can’t have dual character at the same time. The religious character has to be ascertained by the Court considering pleadings of the parties, and evidences led in support of pleadings. No conclusion can be reached on the basis of framing of preliminary issue of law,” the order reads.
The court also noted that more than 32 years have elapsed since filing of the original suit in the dispute. “Due to the interim order operating since 1998, the suit could not proceed. In the national interest, it is required that the suit must proceed expeditiously and be decided with utmost urgency with the cooperation of both the contesting parties without resorting to any dilatory tactics,” the court said, further directing the trial court to proceed with the matter expeditiously and conclude the proceedings preferably within a period of next six months.
Putting to rest the controversy pertaining to the scientific survey done by the Archaeological Survey Of India (ASI) inside the mosque, the court said the report of the same survey shall also be filed in the other suits. It also added that if the lower court feels that a survey of any part is necessary, the lower court shall issue necessary directions to carry out further survey.
The judgment by Justice Agarwal comes three months after then Chief Justice of Allahabad HC Pritinker Diwaker had withdrawn Gyanvapi dispute cases from a single judge (Justice Prakash Padia) citing “judicial propriety”.
