Gyanvapi case: One of five petitioners to withdraw, says lawyer

Advocate Hari Shankar Jain, who is one of the lawyers representing the five women, said Singh will withdraw from the suit on Monday. “She is withdrawing but that will not affect our case. The other four will continue with the legal proceedings,” said Jain.

Asked why Singh was pulling out, Jain said: “There must be some reason if she is withdrawing.”

Singh was not available for comment, with Jain citing “security concerns” as the reason why she did not wish to speak to the media.

The other petitioners were also not available for comment. A family member of one of them said they did not wish to speak to the media at this juncture.

The dispute has been bubbling through the last week with a court-ordered video survey halted on Saturday after the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (Gyanvapi) filed an application in the Varanasi court seeking the replacement of Advocate Commissioner Ajai Kumar, accusing him of being “biased”. The matter is scheduled to be heard on Monday.

On April 8, while hearing the petitioners, Civil Judge (Senior Division), Varanasi, Ravi Kumar Diwakar, had appointed Kumar to carry out a survey of the Maa Shringar Gauri Sthal at the disputed site — and directed him to “prepare videography of the action” and submit a report.

On April 21, the Allahabad High Court dismissed a petition filed by the masjid committee challenging the local court’s order. On April 26, the Varanasi court again ordered videography of the disputed site, which began on Friday afternoon amid heavy security.

The petitioners have sought protection of their right to religion guaranteed by Article 25 of the Constitution, and orders for the defendants (mosque committee) to not create any hindrance to worship at the disputed site.

The petition had sought freedom to worship Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesh, Lord Hanuman and Nandiji in the “old temple complex situated at settlement Plot No. 9130”.

The mosque side has claimed that the petitioners should first identify the plot. “They should first tell the court where exactly is this plot that they are talking about. We had asked the Advocate Commissioner to identify plot No. 9130 before they began the survey, but he did not listen to us. They should first clarify where this plot is,” said a mosque official.

Meanwhile, the local police said they are trying to identify five people who raised “objectionable slogans” at the site when the team of surveyors visited on Saturday. Police have so far arrested one person in this regard, identifying him as Abdul Salam (47).

Salam, a resident of Chandauli district who works in Varanasi, was booked under IPC sections for rioting, creating obstruction in government work, and under section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act for loitering and preventing access to a site. He has been sent to judicial custody. “We will soon identify and arrest the others,” said a senior police officer.