Kashi-Gyanvapi Dispute Case |"Lord Visheshwar's Temple Was Destroyed But Its Religious Character Didn't Change": Lord's Next Friend Argue In Allahabad HC

In the ongoing hearing before the Allahabad High Court in connection with the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque dispute, the next friend of Lord Vishweshwar, one of the contesting respondents in the case, today argued Lord Visheshwar has been in existence from ancient time, i.e., Satyug up till now.

Before the bench of Justice Prakash Padia, the next friend of Lord Vishweshwar further argued that if the temple (of the lord vishveshwar) had been destroyed by any means, its  religious character never changed, and therefore, Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 won't be applicable because the structure of old temple was built prior to the 15th Century.

It may be noted that the aforesaid provision deals with the declaration as to the religious character of certain places of worship and in this regard, the Next Friend of Lord Vishweshwar argued that the said act won't be applicable as the structure of old temple was built prior to the 15th Century.

"...it is clear from the averments of the plaint that the property in question, i.e. the temple of Lord Visheshwar has been in existence from ancient time, i.e., Satyug (सतयगय) up till now and the Swayambhu Lord Visheshwar is situated in the disputed structure. It is further argued that if the temple has been destroyed by any means, the religious character never changed, therefore, Section 4 of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991 is not applicable because the structure of old temple was built prior to the 15th Century," Advocate Vijay Shankar Rastogi, the Court appointed next friend of Lord Vishweshwar.

Stressing that mere registration of the property in the Waqf Act does not affect the rights of a person who is not a Muslim, he fjurther argued that the Waqf Act is applied only in the disputes arising between Muslims and therefore, even if the disputed structure/property in question is registered under the waqf act, it doesn't have any effect over the claim of Hindus as the Hindus have the right over the said property being lord vishveshwar's temple.

It was specifically argued by him that the Muslim party is not clear that under which Act and in which year, the property in dispute had been registered as Waqf property. It was also his submission that there is no evidence in this regard given by the defendant before any Court.

He further argued that the Waqf Act, 1954 had never been applicable in the State of U.P. at any point of time. Due to paucity of time, arguments could not be concluded and therefore, the matter along with other connected matters was listed on April 28, 2022 at 2:00 p.m. for further hearing.