According to Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, the advocate for the Hindu side in the Gyanvapi case, a Live Law report on the Gyanvapi case hearing in the Allahabad High Court is inaccurate and erroneous. He accused Live Law of unfairness in its reporting, claiming that its coverage on today’s hearing before the Allahabad High Court was incorrect. Advocate Jain alleged that the report ignored several aspects and observations by the court and that his arguments in the court were not reported.
Advocate Jain took to Twitter and wrote, “The report of live law are not correct with regards to todays hearing before allahabad high court. Many aspects and observations by the court have been missed. Also the submissions made by me have not been reported and incomplete reporting has been done.”
The report of live law are not correct with regards to todays hearing before allahabad high court. Many aspects and observations by the court have been missed. Also the submissions made by me have not been reported and incomplete reporting has been done
— Vishnu Shankar Jain (@Vishnu_Jain1) November 21, 2022
The Allahabad High Court heard a petition today contesting a Varanasi court’s decision to refuse Hindu devotees’ request for a scientific study of the Shivling unearthed inside the Gyanvapi structure.
OpIndia reached out to Advocate Jain on the issue, who stated that the Live Law report contains inaccurate details. He said that the report by Live Law contains factual errors and several important observations have been missed. An archived version of the report can be found here.
“Live Law reported that the ASI has submitted that carbon dating of the Shivling cannot be done as it can damage it, but these remarks were not made by ASI in the court. Instead, the ASI asked 3 months time to assess what can be done to determine the age of the Shivling,” Advocate Jain said.
He further added, “The observation of the court that there is a need for such scientific investigation otherwise how will plaintiffs prove the case has been cleverly omitted from the reporting.” He added that the court also observed that the district judge is wrong when he recorded a finding that the Shivling will be damaged. “How can this be presumed without even asking the ASI,” the court observed according to Advocate Vishnu Jain.
The ASI, represented by Manoj Kumar Singh, stated that relative carbon dating can be done to assess the age of the Shivling. Advocate Jain submitted in the court that it was essential to determine the age of the Shivling without damaging it.
During the hearing, the court questioned Advocate Jain if the Shivling and fountain question was contested, to which Jain responded by referring to the affidavit of the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee, which disputed that the structure is a fountain and not a Shivling. The court listed the matter for further hearing on November 30.
Today ASI has sought time to file a report with regard to the age of shivlingam. Prima facie the asi is of the view that there are modern techniques by which the age and character can be ascertained. The next date of hearing is 30.11.22 before hc
— Vishnu Shankar Jain (@Vishnu_Jain1) November 21, 2022
Earlier, on October 14, the Varanasi district court turned down the petition of the Hindu side, which demanded a scientific evaluation of the Shivling found inside the Gyanvapi mosque complex.
The Shivling was discovered inside the Wuzukhana of the Gyanvapi complex on May 16, 2022, during a survey by the court-appointed panel. The Hindu side has maintained that this is major proof that the mosque was erected by razing Lord Vishweshwar’s temple in Kashi.
