Gyanvapi: 'ASI Being Used As A Tool To Collect Evidence Of Hindu Plaintiffs; No 'Shiva Linga' Found In Spot Inspection': Masjid Committee In HC

Moving to Allahabad High Court challenging the District Court's order passed on July 21 for the ASI survey of the Mosque Premises (except for Wuzukhana), the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee which takes care of 22 mosques, including the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi has claiming that the the ASI is being used as a tool by the opposite parties/plaintiffs/petitioners to collect evidence on their behalf.

Challenging the Varanasi District Judge's order, the Mosque Committee has stated even when the ASI was not a party before it, yet it passed an order directing it to survey the mosque.

"...the Court was in such haste that it passed the order without applying the principles of jurisprudence regarding the representation of parties to whom the direction or order was addressed. The ASI was neither a party nor was invited to seek its comment by the learned District judge Varanasi while passing the impugned order itself speaks a lot and the amount to miscarriage of justice," the plea avers.

The petition, filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has also called into question the genuineness of the Survey and the "speed" by which 30 ASI Officials reached the spot and started the survey work pursuant to the Court's July 21 order.  

Pointing to the submissions/admission of the plaintiffs- 4 Hindu women worshippers before the Varanasi Court that they have no evidence of actual facts existing within the Gyanvapi Mosque premises and behind the 'artificial' walls and beneath the structure, the plea adds that the plaintiffs are asking for "evidence of something for which they have no proof and the evidence collection work of plaintiff is being shifted upon and entrusted to the to the archaeological survey of India which is not at all permissible under the law"

"Because although the spot inspection took place (last year) but no shiva ling was found during the proceedings instead a sprinkler (Fauwwara) was found. The commissioner report submitted by the advocate commissioner had not yet been disposed of. Although the commission was purportedly issued to collect evidence on behalf of the plaintiffs who otherwise had neither any documentary evidence nor any other evidence, In such circumstances no commission can be issued to collect evidence therefore archaeological survey of India cannot be directed to undertake survey and the plaintiffs of the suit must stand on their own legs. In fact in the garb of application paper no. 327C plaintiff no. 2 to 4 want to collect evidence on their behalf, whereas law does not permit it." 

The matter is being heard right now before Chief Justice Pritinker Diwaker, follow the thread for live updates: