Gyanvapi Case: The Muslim side filed a petition in the Supreme Court on Thursday, challenging the Allahabad High Court's judgement allowing an Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) investigation at the Gyanvapi mosque.
The case was brought before Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, who was presiding over a five-judge constitution bench hearing arguments on the Article 370 issue at the time.
This action came after the Allahabad High Court rejected a petition from the Gyanvapi committee aimed at invalidating a district court order controlling the ASI to conduct an extensive scientific survey.
Including research studies if necessary, to determine whether or not the Gyanvapi mosque stands on the ruins of a previous temple near the Kashi Vishwanath temple.
On July 21st, the Varanasi district court issued a decree instructing the ASI to perform the assessment and determine the mosque's historical origins. This verdict was confirmed by the Allahabad High Court, which stated that it was just and reasonable.
The court also expressed confidence in the ASI's promise that the survey would not damage the mosque's construction. However, the court underlined that no digging would be permitted as part of the survey within the mosque.
Furthermore, the 'wazukhana' section of the mosque, where Hindu petitioners claimed to have found a'shivling,' would be excluded from the survey because the Supreme Court had previously safeguarded that region.
The argument focuses around claims made by Hindu campaigners that a temple formerly stood on the site before being dismantled under the orders of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb in the 17th century.
With the case now before the Supreme Court, it will be interesting to see how the legal proceedings play out and what the final judgement on the ASI study and the historical claims surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque will be.
As the case progresses, all sides will offer their views, and the judiciary will carefully weigh the facts and historical records in order to reach a reasonable and fair verdict.
Because of the sensitivity of the matter and its significance to religious sensibilities, this will be a highly watched legal battle with far-reaching repercussions.
