LUCKNOW: As the Anjuman Intezamia Masajid (AIM), the mosque management committee is set to challenge the Varanasi District Court order upholding the maintainability of the petition filed by five Hindu women plaintiffs seeking rights to worship Maa Shringar Gauri and other deities on mosque premises in Allahabad HC, the lawyers of the plaintiffs are also contemplating to file a caveat in upper court in the coming days.
As per the plaintiffs’ lawyers, caveat from their side would be filed before High Court in the next couple of days to ensure that before passing any injunction against the Varanasi District Court order, the plaintiffs’ submissions are also heard.
Notably, following the dismissal of their petition challenging the maintainability of the plaintiffs’ plea by the district court, the defendants’ lawyer
Merazuddin Siddiqui, on Monday, had made the intentions clear of moving to Allahabad High Court with a revision petition.
The defendants’ lawyers said that the revision petition would be filed in HC after studying the district court order thoroughly.
Meanwhile, in a related plea in fast track court by Hindu plaintiffs seeking the ban on entry of Muslims inside the Gyanvapi mosque after the recovery of a ‘Shivling’ like structure from the Wuzukhana and also the right to worship the Shivlinga, the court deferred the hearing to October 6.
The Varanasi district court on Monday said it will continue to hear the plea seeking daily worship of Hindu deities whose idols are located on an outer wall of the Gyanvapi Masjid, dismissing the mosque committee's argument that the case is not maintainable.
The committee takes care of 22 mosques, including the Gyanvapi Masjid, in the city and it has been presenting the Muslim side in the Gyanvapi mosque-Shringar Gauri complex case.
Meanwhile, advocate Vishu Jain, who represented the Hindu plaintiffs, said "If the Muslim side moves the High Court, then we will also go there and file a caveat so that the High Court does not give any order without listening to the Hindu side."
"We have been hugely disappointed with the order of the district court. We are sad that the court rejected all of our arguments but we will not give up," committee joint secretary Mohammad Yasin said on Tuesday.
"We are consulting senior lawyers of the High Court to challenge the verdict," he added.
To a question on AIMIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi's statement that this case is going the same way the Babri mosque case proceeded, Yasin said, "As of now, 13 cases related to the Gyanvapi are going on.
After the order of the court, more cases will be registered in the country."
"Now, when some people want to vitiate the atmosphere of the country, then what can we do? We will continue our legal battle," he said.
Committee's advocate Merajuddin Siddiqui on Tuesday said, "The order of the district court is not justifiable and we will move the High Court."
However, some Muslim women under the banner of the Muslim Mahila Foundation rejoiced at the district court order, performing an aarti of Lord Shiva.
Nazneen Ansari, who heads the foundation, told PTI, "Hatred in the name of religion will not be allowed to be spread in the country. In the Gyanvapi case, we are with the Hindu side because our aim is to remove the stigma put by (Mughal ruler) Aurangzeb."
"The honour of Islam lies in handing over the rights of the Hindus to them," she said.
The court order has reignited the Kashi Vishwanath temple-Gyanvapi Masjid debate.
The mosque is located next to the iconic temple and the case in the Varanasi court revived claims that the mosque was built on a portion of the Hindu structure demolished on the orders of Mughal emperor Aurangzeb.
Earlier, Hindu plaintiffs in a court-mandated survey of the complex had claimed that a Shivling was found there, a claim rejected by the Muslim side.
Later, the Supreme Court shifted the case to the district court, directing it to first decide on the maintainability of the case, filed by five Hindu women seeking permission to offer daily prayers before the idols of Shringar Gauri.
One of the five petitioners in the case, Laxmi Devi, said they will now ask the court to go for carbon dating.
The procedure is adopted to ascertain the age of a structure.
(With PTI Inputs)