What is the Gyanvapi Mosque Case? History and Timeline of the Legal Battle Explained

A Varanasi court on Wednesday ordered that the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report on the Gyanvapi Masjid case be made public and provided to both sides.

The Varanasi district court, on July 21 last year, directed the Archeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a “detailed scientific survey” — including excavations, wherever necessary — to determine if the mosque located next to the Kashi Vishwanath temple was built upon a temple.

Earlier in December, the ASI had submitted the survey report in a sealed cover on the Gyanvapi mosque complex in the district court.

Last week, the cleaning work of the Wazukhana or ablution area of the Gyanvapi mosque was completed under the supervision of the district magistrate of Varanasi following orders of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had on January 16 allowed a plea moved by Hindu women plaintiffs for cleaning the water tank in the Gyanvapi mosque that is located in an area that has been sealed.

All About the Gyanvapi Mosque

The Gyanvapi Mosque has been a subject of extensive legal and historical debate as many Hindu groups believe that the mosque stood atop a demolished portion of the Kashi Vishwanath temple.

The mosque is located close to the iconic Kashi Vishwanath temple and the current judicial proceedings started after a group of women sought permission for daily prayers before the idols on its outer walls.

Several petitions have been filed before the Supreme Court, Allahabad High Court, and Varanasi court regarding the Gyanvapi mosque case. As per reports, there are 18 pleas related to Gyanvapi dispute being heard by various courts of Varanasi, besides the original suit in the High Court.

The petitions seek to address various aspects of the dispute, including the mosque’s alleged construction by Mughal emperor Aurangzeb and the right to worship inside the disputed site.

How Did the Gyanvapi Masjid Case Start?

In October 1991, a petition was filed before Varanasi civil judge on behalf of Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar and five others demanding the restoration of Gyanvapiland to the adjacent Kashi Vishwanath temple. The petition sought removal of Muslims from the complex and the demolition of mosque.

The petitioners of 1991 had said that the mosque was built on the orders of Aurangzeb by demolishing a part of the Kashi Vishwanath Temple during his reign in the 16th century.

However, in 1997, the Varanasi Civil Court said that the suit was not maintainable under the Places of Worship Act, 1991. Subsequently, both the temple and mosque sides filed several revision petitions before district court.

In 1998, the District Judge merged all the petitions and ordered the civil court to adjudicate the dispute afresh after considering all evidence. But the High Court stayed the Varanasi district court order. The stay continued for 22 years with the High Court continuing to extend it.

In 2020, the plaintiffs again approached the Varanasi civil court to reopen the case which had been stayed since 1998. The plaintiffs cited a Supreme Court order from 2018 which said that a stay order has to be rectified every six months. Since this was not done in the case, the civil court agreed to reopen the case.

The Allahabad High Court stayed proceedings in the Kashi Vishwanath Mandir-Gyanvapi Masjid case in a Varanasi court in 2021.

Gyanvapi Case: Court Battle So Far

• The ongoing controversy began in 2019, after the Supreme Court verdict in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi title dispute. In the second case, Varanasi-based lawyer Vijay Shankar Rastogi, who identified himself as the “next friend” of Swayambhu Jyotirlinga Bhagwan Vishweshwar, filed a petition in the lower court claiming illegality in the construction of the Gyanvapi mosque and sought an archaeological survey of the mosque.
• The Varanasi civil judge directed the ASI to conduct a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi complex. The Allahabad High Court stayed the order and clubbed this case with the original suit.
• In 2021, a third case was filed by five Hindu women seeking permission court to conduct daily prayers at “a shrine behind the western wall of the mosque complex” and protection of the idols. The Varanasi court in 2022 heard the petition by the five women.
• The Varanasi court appointed Advocate Commissioner Ajay Kumar Mishra to carry out an inspection of the site, “prepare videography of the action” and submit a report. The Hindu side claimed that a ‘Shivling’ has been found by the survey team in the ‘wazukhana’ in the Mosque complex.
• The Gyanvapi mosque survey was concluded on May 16. The Hindu side in the matter has claimed that a ‘Shivling’ was found inside a reservoir on the mosque complex during the survey. The Muslim side, however, dismissed the claim and said it was only a ‘fountain’.
• The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) termed the court order for videography as a clear violation of The Places of Worship Act, 1991. As per the Places of Worship Act, 1991, the law prohibits any change in the religious character of a place of worship from as it existed on August 15, 1947.
• In September 2022, the Varanasi district court rejected the Anjuman Committee’s plea challenging Hindu worshippers’ plea (for the right to pray inside the disputed site) in the Gyanvapi case. The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee (AIMC) then challenged the Varanasi court order and filed a petition before the Allahabad high court.
• In May 2023, the Varanasi district court agreed to hear a plea for an ASI survey, following an Allahabad High Court order. The Supreme Court had ordered the protection of the area around the claimed ‘shivling’, found when another court ordered a video survey of the complex.
• In June this year, the HC upheld the Varanasi district court order that said Hindu groups are not barred by the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, and the suit seeking the right to worship inside the Gyanvapi mosque was maintainable.
• In July, the Varanasi court issued directions for a “scientific investigation” of the mosque premises by the ASI. District and Sessions Judge Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha directed the ASI to “conduct ground penetrating radar survey just below the three domes of the building in question and conduct excavation, if required”.
• However, the Supreme Court on Monday halted the “detailed scientific survey” till 5 pm on July 26, saying “some breathing time” needed to be granted to appeal against the order.
• In August, the High court upheld the district judge order allowing the survey of Gyanvapi Mosque. The ASI started the survey in the barricaded area of the Gyanvapi premises, excluding its sealed section, on August 4.
• On November 30, the district court had asked the ASI to submit the survey report by December 11 after five extensions were granted on September 6, October 5, November 2, November 17 and November 30.
• On December 11, the Varanasi district court gave one more week to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to submit a scientific survey report of the Gyanvapi mosque complex.
• The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) on December 18 submitted its report on the scientific survey of the Gyanvapi mosque premises in the Varanasi district court.