The court has given its verdict in the Gyanvapi Masjid dispute in Varanasi, UP. Now the court has considered this case worth hearing. At the same time, the court has dismissed the petition of the Anjuman Insanjariya Committee and will now continue to hear it. Also, now the next hearing of this case will be on 22 September.
What was the petition of the Anjuman Prajapatia Committee?
First of all, let us tell you that the Anjuman Arrangement Committee had said not to allow worship in many Deities, including the Shringar Gauri Temple located in the Gyanvapi Masjid complex. Apart from this, in his appeal, 1991 Places of Worship was mentioned. At the same time, the Muslim side was always claiming that because of the Places of Worship Act, the suit of the Hindu side should be dismissed. At the same time, the Muslim side had said that the nature of the religious place cannot be changed and this property belongs to the Waqf and is registered in the Waqf. This side had also said that there is no ‘Shivalinga’ fountain in Gyanvapi.
Earlier, Abdul Batin Nomani, secretary of the Anjuman Arrangement Committee, had also told that a fountain has been installed in all the three old Shahi mosques of Banaras. Abdul Batin Nomani said that there are 3 royal mosques in Banaras, in which Gyanvapi, Alamgiri and Dharara, all three have fountains. He says that many such fountains will be found all over UP.
What is Places of Worship Act?
According to the official website, the Places of Worship Act states, a religious place of any one religion existing before 15 August 1947 cannot be converted into a religious place of another religion. According to this law, the religious place as it was at the time of independence will remain the same in future also. That is, it has been told that no changes can be made in religious places now. If someone does this, he can be sent to jail. It is clearly stated in this law that neither these religious places can be demolished, nor can they be changed or constructed for other religions.
What’s the matter then?
Now the Hindu side wants that this Act should not be applicable in this and this matter had reached the court in 1991, so it cannot be applicable in this case. On the other hand, the other side says, when the law is made in the country, it should be looked into. Let us tell you that this law was made in 1991 during the Congress government of Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao and the decision was taken regarding the Ram temple.
Get the more Knowledge information