On 31st May 2023, the Allahabad High Court dismissed the revision petition of the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee in connection with the Gyanvapi case of Varanasi. The Anjuman Intezamia had challenged the maintainability of a plea by five Hindu women worshippers filed in Varanasi Court seeking the right to worship inside the Gyanvapi complex in Varanasi. The Varanasi District Court is hearing the case, and the High Court has ruled that the case will continue.
The mosque management committee filed a revision plea against the order of the Varanasi District and Sessions Judge, which had rejected their application challenging the maintainability of the suit brought forth by five Hindu women.
The five women applicants have contended that they should be allowed to perform regular Darshan and worship of Shringar Gauri and other deities in the Gyanvapi complex. The Muslim side had objected to the maintainability of the suit. On 12th September 2023, the Varanasi court held this suit to be maintainable. The Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee challenged the maintainability of the suit in the High Court. The High Court has now dismissed the plea clearing the way for hearing the case ahead.
Justice JJ Munir, the only judge on the bench, noted that both Hindu devotees and the Mosque Management at Gyanvapi mutually agreed that the regular worship, including the pooja and darshan of deities like Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesha, and Lord Hanuman, was a customary practice on the disputed property before the year 1990.
Justice JJ Munir said in his order, “The restriction of that right to a single day, in the opinion of this Court, is a continuing wrong within the meaning of Section 22 of the Act of 1963 (the Limitation Act).”
In its order dated May 31, 2023, the court emphasized that the right to worship the deities cannot be equated with the right to office or property, as the latter entails a definitive loss at the time of ousting, whereas the former involves ongoing consequences of the injury.
The court said, “The denial of the right to worship the object of it, that is the Deity, is a continuing wrong, that happens every day and every minute it is denied.”
In its judgment, the high court emphasized that the Hindu women’s suit does not seek to alter the property’s character. Rather, it asserts the ongoing right of daily pooja and darshan of the deities within the old temple located on the suit property. This right was traditionally exercised by Hindus without any hindrance until the year 1990.
The court further observed that the temporal restriction of allowing pooja once a year was imposed in 1993 by the State government and the district administration due to administrative exigencies.
The court said, “The right was not restricted to a single day upon an objection or resistance by the revisionist. The right of the devotees of Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesha, Lord Hanuman and the other Deities in the suit property, according to the pleadings in the plaint, is an existing right, which the plaintiffs, as such devotees, seek to enforce throughout the year for themselves.”
The court also noted its failure to comprehend how allowing the pooja and darshan of Hindu deities on a daily or weekly basis, which posed no threat to the character of the mosque, could result in the conversion or alteration of the mosque’s character.
Therefore, emphasizing that the suit at hand is specifically focused on enforcing the plaintiffs’ right to worship in accordance with established traditions, the court determined that the extent to which this right can be established remains relevant for the current lawsuit and should be determined during the trial.
Notably, a single-judge bench of the high court has reserved its judgment in the consolidated five petitions related to the land dispute at Gyanvapi. The primary issue addressed in these petitions revolves around the survey of the Gyanvapi complex conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
