The varanasi court on monday gave a crucial ruling in the ongoing Gyanvapi mosque controversy, stating that the Hindu petitioners' plea would be maintainable in court and that a bench would soon hear the case. While the Bhartiya Janta party and vishwa Hindu Parishad applauded the district court bench's judgement, the Muslim community and other political leaders sharply criticised the varanasi district court's order.
In accordance with a ruling from the supreme court, the district court is hearing the matter. The varanasi civil judge's case would be heard by a senior and seasoned member of the UP judicial service, following the supreme Court's directive, "keeping in mind the intricacy and sensitivity of the situation."
Following multiple Hindu women's requests for permission to pray inside the masjid on the grounds that the mosque contains statues of Hindu goddesses and gods, a controversy involving the Gyanvapi Masjid in Uttar Pradesh developed. The petition was filed by five ladies asking for permission to regularly worship Hindu gods whose statues are said to be on the Gyanvapi mosque's exterior wall. The Gyanvapi mosque, according to the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, is a Waqf property, raising doubts about the validity of the claim.
In accordance with a ruling from the supreme court, the district court is hearing the matter. The varanasi civil judge's case would be heard by a senior and seasoned member of the UP judicial service, following the supreme Court's directive, "keeping in mind the intricacy and sensitivity of the situation."
Following multiple Hindu women's requests for permission to pray inside the masjid on the grounds that the mosque contains statues of Hindu goddesses and gods, a controversy involving the Gyanvapi Masjid in Uttar Pradesh developed. The petition was filed by five ladies asking for permission to regularly worship Hindu gods whose statues are said to be on the Gyanvapi mosque's exterior wall. The Gyanvapi mosque, according to the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, is a Waqf property, raising doubts about the validity of the claim.
