Gyanvapi mosque dispute: Fresh plea in SC seeks intervention in proceedings 

By PTI

NEW DELHI: A recent plea has been filed within the Supreme Court searching for intervention within the Gyanvapi mosque dispute.

It contended that Muslims can not assert any proper in respect of any piece of land claiming to be mosque until it has been constructed on legally owned and occupied virgin land.

The petitioner said that property vested within the deity continues to be the deity’s property regardless of the truth that any particular person has taken unlawful possession and supplied namaz.

The petition, filed by advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay via advocate Ashwani Kumar Dubey, submitted that solely these locations may be protected, which have been erected or constructed in accordance with the private regulation of the one who erected/constructed them, however locations erected or constructed in derogation of the private regulation, can’t be termed as a ‘place of worship’.

“It is submitted that retrospective cutoff date was fixed August 15, 1947 to legalise the illegal acts of barbaric invaders. Though, Hindu Law (Temple Character never changes) was ‘Law in force’ at the commencement of the Constitution by virtue of Article 372(1). It is submitted that Hindus, Jains, Buddhists, Sikhs have right to profess, practice propagate religion as provided in their religious scriptures and Article 13 prohibits from making law which takes away their rights,” the plea mentioned.

The petition contended that the standing of a mosque might be given solely to such constructions which have been constructed in keeping with tenets of Islam and mosques constructed in opposition to the provisions contained in Islamic regulation can’t be termed as mosque.

Anjuman Intezamia Masjid, the administration committee of the Gyanvapi mosque, had moved the apex courtroom searching for a keep on the survey of the complicated.

The high courtroom on May 20 had transferred the civil go well with filed by Hindu devotees on Gyanvapi mosque from civil choose (senior division) to district choose, Varanasi saying trying on the complexities and sensitivity of the difficulty, it’s higher if a senior judicial officer having an expertise of over 25-30 years handles this case.

The apex courtroom directed the district choose to resolve on the precedence of the applying beneath Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC (on maintainability) filed by the mosque committee, which mentioned that the civil go well with is barred by a 1991 regulation of Parliament, be determined upon the switch of papers of go well with from the civil choose (senior division).