The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the Hindu prayers in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi even as it ordered a “status quo” on the religious observances by both the Hindu and Muslim sides inside the mosque premises.
The court was hearing a fresh plea of the Gyanvapi mosque management committee against an Allahabad High Court decision upholding a lower court’s order allowing Hindu prayers in the southern cellar of the mosque.
SC Refuses Plea To Stop Hindu Prayers
A bench of Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra issued notice on a plea by the mosque committee challenging the Allahabad High Court order dismissing its appeal against the trial court order allowing the worship.
The court noted that the mosque has an entrance at the north side for worshippers to enter and offer ‘namaz’ while the cellar has a separate entrance on the south side. The bench allowed puja in the cellar and namaz in the mosque to continue for now.
Muslim Side Applied To Stop Prayers in Gyanvapi
On behalf of the Muslim side, senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi submitted that between 1993 and 2023, that there was no ‘puja’ and the tehkhana was locked in gyanvapi. They invoked the Places of Worship Act in the suit to contend that the status quo prevailing in 1947 can’t be altered. He said prayers in the mosque take place everywhere, including on the top but, now there has been an application to stop those prayers.
What is Places Of Workship Act?
- The 1991 Act locks the position or “religious identity” of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947, except the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, and barred any court from entertaining a matter that seeks to alter the religious nature of that place.
- The Act, however, has not prevented the spree of litigations in recent months for reclaiming places of worship, with the Hindu parties contesting the “religious nature” of such sites.
The district court had on January 31 allowed the puja to continue. The Allahabad High Court subsequently rejected the plea against the district court’s order.