Gyanvapi mosque row: Supreme Court transfers case to district judge in Varanasi

Gyanvapi Mosque case: The Supreme court said that considering the sensitivity of this civil suit, the court is transferring the case from civil judge senior division Varanasi to district judge in Varanasi.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday (May 20) ordered the transfer of the Gyanvapi mosque case to the District Judge of Varanasi, adding that a senior and experienced judicial officer of UP Judicial services will hear the case, ANI reported. The apex court said that considering the sensitivity of this civil suit, the court is transferring the case from civil judge senior division Varanasi to district judge in Varanasi. The apex court was hearing the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee's plea against the Varanasi district court order that allowed videographic survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque complex, located near the famous Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh. 

The court said that the Masjid Committee's plea should be decided on priority by the district Judge on the transfer of suit. Its May 17 interim order directing protection of the 'Shivling' area and free access to Muslims to offer namaz will continue, the Supreme court added.

The court observed, "A slightly more seasoned and mature hand should hear this case. We're not making aspersion on trial judge. But more seasoned hand should deal with this case and it'll benefit all parties.” 

Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi mentioned that the Commission report is being selectively leaked to the press, to which the court asserted that the selective leaks must stop. the Supreme Court said that “once the Commission's report is there, there cannot be selective leaks. Do not leaks thing to the press, only judge opens the report.” 

In a significant remark, the Supreme Court said that ascertainment of religious character is not banned under section 3 of the 1991 Places of Worship Act.

“Forget there is mosque on one side and temple on the other. Suppose there is a Parsi temple and there is a cross in the corner of the area. Does the presence of 'Agiary' make the cross Agiary or Agiary Christian? This hybrid character is not unknown.” 

“Here a structure of Zoroastrian faith will not make the Christian structure Zoroastrian or vice versa, but the ascertainment of religious character of a place may not necessarily fall foul of section 3 of the 1991 Act,” the court said. 

(With agency inputs)