Varanasi: Ahead of the hearing on the Gyanvapi mosque case, the security around the district court has been beefed up in Varanasi. The hearing is in regard to the petition seeking daily worship of Goddess Shringar Gauri on the mosque premises submitted by five women devotees -- Rakhi Singh of Delhi, Laxmi Devi, Sita Sahu, Manju Vyas and Rekha Pathak -- in the court of civil judge on April 18. The bench hearing the case will comprise District Judge Dr Ajay Krishna.
As informed by the district government counsel Mahendra Prasad Pandey, the district judge court will make clear the points on which the hearing would start on Monday. Meanwhile, senior police personnel said that adequate security arrangements had been made to ensure that there was no trouble from any side over the hearing of the case. "We have deployed adequate forces and barricades have been put up as a precautionary measure," said a senior official.
Earlier, when the case was filed by the group of said women, Ajay Kumar Mishra was appointed as the advocate commissioner for the survey of Gyanvapi mosque. The court commission had thereafter started the survey of Gyanvapi on May 6, which was, however, stalled the next because of protests demanding the removal of Mishra as the advocate commissioner, citing his biased nature.
The court rejected the plea to change Mishra, but also appointed Vishal Singh as special advocate commissioner and Ajay Pratap Singh as an assistant advocate commissioner and resumed the survey on May 14. The survey ended on May 16 amid claims of a 'Shivling' being found in the wuzu pond of Gyanvapi by the petitioners.
On May 17, the court sacked Mishra following complaints of leaking information and asked special advocate commissioner Vishal Singh to table the survey report on May 19. On May 20, the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the survey order passed in the Gyanvapi mosque case and transferred the civil suit filed by Hindu devotees from the civil judge (senior division) to the district judge, Varanasi. "Looking at the 'complexities' and 'sensitivity' of the issue, it is better if a senior judicial officer having experience of over 25-30 years handles this case," the court said while hearing an AIM Committee petition.
Also read: Lawsuit seeking Shahi Idgah's removal: Mathura court fixes July 20 as next date of hearing