Supreme Court to hear Gyanvapi case on Friday, asks Varanasi court to not take any further action in the matter

A bench presided by Justice D Y Chandrachud said it will now hear the matter at 3 pm Friday after it was told that Senior Advocate Hari Shankar Jain, who is representing the Hindu side before the Varanasi court and was indisposed on the last date of hearing, had been discharged from hospital only Wednesday.

Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, appearing for the Committee of Management of Anjuman Intezamia Masjid, Varanasi, told the bench also comprising Justice P S Narasimha that his “only apprehension is that an application has been filed to demolish a wall near the wazu khana” and proceedings are going on.

The court then observed that the proceedings cannot go on in case it defers the hearing.

The bench told Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, who made the request for adjournment, that in view of the apprehension expressed by the other side, they should not press for a hearing before the trial court on Thursday.

The counsel agreed to the suggestion and the court recorded this and directed the trial court to strictly act in terms of its previous order and to desist from taking any further action in the suit.

On May 17, the SC while declining to stay proceedings before a Varanasi court on matters related to the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi mosque complex, had asked the Varanasi district magistrate to secure the area where a Shivling was claimed to have been found during a videographic survey of the mosque area without impeding or restricting the rights of Muslims to access and offer namaz at the mosque.

Hearing a petition by five Hindu women seeking access to pray at “a shrine behind the western wall of the mosque complex”, the Varanasi court, on April 8, had appointed Advocate Commissioner Ajay Kumar Mishra to carry out an inspection of the site, “prepare videography of the action” and submit a report. The mosque committee challenged this before the Allahabad High Court which dismissed the plea on April 21. The committee then approached the Supreme Court.