Varanasi court allows puja at southern cellar of Gyanvapi mosque complex

Late Wednesday, S M Yasin, Joint Secretary of the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee, which had opposed the plea for allowing puja in the southern cellar and said it would approach a higher court against the order, said, “The administration reached the mosque complex late evening. They cut the barricading towards the southern cellar. We were not informed about this, and we still haven’t received a copy of the court order. We will move the Supreme Court tomorrow.”

In a post on X, Akhilesh Yadav, SP chief and Leader of Opposition in the state Assembly said: “Due process has to be maintained while following any court order. The Varanasi Court fixed a 7-day period for it. What we are seeing now is a concerted effort to go beyond the due process and prevent any legal recourse that can be taken.”

The cellar, which Hindu plaintiffs call ‘Vyasji ka tehkhana’ (Vyasji’s cellar), is part of the mosque complex.

Hindu litigants, appearing before the court, have claimed that the Gyanvapi mosque was built on the site of the earlier Kashi Vishwanath temple after its destruction in the 17th century. The existing Kashi Vishwanath temple stands adjacent to the mosque.

The ASI report also stated that “the pre-existing structure appears to have been destroyed in the 17th century, during the reign of Aurangzeb and part of it was modified and reused in the existing structure”.

The district court’s direction for prayers in the cellar came on the petition of Shailendra Kumar Pathak, head priest of Acharya Ved Vyas Peeth temple, who said that the Vyas family had been offering prayers in the cellar even during the rule of the British but the practice was stopped in December 1993.

According to Judge Vishvesha’s order, the lawyer for Pathak said that the court, while disposing of his application (9G) on January 17, passed an order allowing the application.

“The court had deputed the Varanasi District Magistrate as the receiver for the southern cellar. The court had directed that the Varanasi District Magistrate will keep the cellar in his possession and to keep it secure.”

It quoted the plaintiff’s lawyer pointing out that the order had been passed only on the first part of the application but not on the second part though the plaintiff had sought directions on both parts of the application.

After going through his January 17 order, Judge Vishvesha said that the plaintiff had also said that prayers used to be done in the southern cellar.

“In December, 1993, priest Vyasji was stopped from entering the area beyond the barricade. Hence, the prayers, raag bhog and other rituals were stopped. Vyasji used to perform puja there from the time of the British and that he had possession, and he prayed there until 1993. After that, the door to the cellar was removed. Several Hindu sculptures and puja material are still in the cellar. It is necessary to do puja of the idols there in a controlled manner. Without any authority, the district administration and government stopped puja there in 1993. Hence, the court should appoint a receiver and allow puja to be done there. Order was passed for the receiver on January 17, but not on puja,” the order stated, quoting the plaintiff’s lawyer.

Opposing the prayer to allow puja in the cellar, lawyers for the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee told the court that no one from the Vyas family ever did puja there. “Hence, there was no question of stopping puja in 1993. At the said spot, no idol was there. The plaintiff’s claim that the Vyas family had possession of the cellar is false. The cellar has been in possession of the mosque committee, and there are no idols of Gods or Goddesses there,” the order quoted the mosque committee lawyers telling the court.

The Varanasi district administration had taken possession of the southern cellar on January 24. District Magistrate S Rajalingam had said, “We have followed court orders and taken possession of the cellar.”

Following the court’s direction allowing prayers in the cellar, Advocate Akhlaq Ahmad, who represents the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Committee in the Varanasi court, said, “We will follow the process and approach a higher court… In 1937, in the Din Mohammad case, the civil judge of Varanasi had decided that the mosque and its adjoining buildings are Waqf property. That is not being considered by the court currently hearing the cases.”

“Two surveys have been done of the mosque premises – the first one by a Commission in 2022, and the second by the ASI which took months (last year). In both surveys, nothing was found in the southern cellar… It is a rule that if a case is challenged under Order 7 Rule 11 (of Civil Procedure Code) dealing with the maintainability of a case, then it is decided first. But here, the matter under Order 7 Rule 11 is pending, all other aspects are being decided,” he said.