Hindu Temple Underneath Varanasi’s Gyan Vapi Mosque? Courtroom Orders Survey

Advertisement

A petition contended that Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb demolished an historic temple and constructed the mosque.

Varanasi:

A courtroom in Varanasi has ordered the Archaeological Survey of India to hold out a bodily survey of the city’s Gyanvapi Mosque, situated subsequent to the well-known Kashi Vishwanath Temple.

The courtroom ordered the survey whereas ruling on a three-decade outdated petition, which contended that Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb had demolished an historic temple of “Lord Vishweshwar” and “constructed a mosque with the assistance of the ruins of the mentioned temple”.

In its order, the courtroom requested the Director Normal of the ASI to “represent a five-member committee of eminent individuals who’re consultants and well-versed within the science of archaeology, two out of which ought to ideally belong to the m inority group”.

Advertisement
Advertisement

The courtroom additionally requested the ASI Chief to nominate an eminent individual — a scholar or a longtime academician — as an observer for the committee.

In its order, the courtroom mentioned, “The prime goal of the Archaeological Survey shall be to seek out out whether or not the spiritual construction standing at current on the ‘disputed website’ is a superimposition, alteration or addition or there’s a structural overlapping of any type, with or over, every other spiritual construction”.

Advertisement

The committee, the courtroom added, “shall additionally hint whether or not any temple belonging to the Hindu group ever existed earlier than the mosque in query was constructed or superimposed or added upon it on the ‘disputed’ website'”.

The unique petition within the case was filed in 1991 however a clutch of Varanasi residents contended the mosque was constructed over an historic temple in 1664 by the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.

R Shamshad, a member of the All-India Muslim Private Regulation Board, mentioned the lawsuit is non-maintainable and ought to be dismissed in view of a legislation made in 1991.

“A petition was filed searching for dismissal of this go well with on which the district courtroom has handed an order. Now the entire difficulty is pending within the Allahabad Excessive Courtroom on whether or not the go well with will be heard or not. On this background, when the problem is pending within the Allahabad excessive courtroom, I don’t assume there may be any justification in such an order. Such an order mustn’t have been handed at this stage,” he added.

Source link

Advertisement

Leave a Comment