Supreme Court refuses to stay order allowing Hindu puja in Gyanvapi mosque cellar

The Supreme Court on Monday refused to stay the Varanasi court order of January 31 by which it had permitted a Hindu priest to offer prayers and conduct puja in the southern cellar of the Gyanvapi Mosque. .A bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud with Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra ordered the parties to maintain status quo at the Gyanvapi premises to enable both the puja as well as Muslim prayers.The Court said that the Hindu priest conducting the puja will enter from south and pray in cellar and Muslims will pray in northern side as they enter from there.This arrangement will continue till the case is finally decided."At this stage, bearing in mind the fact that namaz is being offered by Muslim communities unhindered after the district court and High Court orders, and that prayers in tehkhana is limited to the Hindu priests, it is important to maintain the status quo, so that both communities can perform religious worship in above terms," the Court said in its order.The status quo "shall not be disturbed by either of the parties without obtaining the previous sanction and leave of this Court", the top court said in the order.The Court also issued notice to the Hindu parties on the appeal filed by Muslim parties and listed the matter for consideration in July.It also ordered that Hindu parties will continue to hold puja only in terms of the January 31 order of the civil court."The religious observance of Hindus shall be in accordance with the order of January 31, 2024," the top court stated..While refusing stay on conducting puja in cellar, the Court reasoned that the access to the cellar where the puja is held and the area where Muslims pray are different.The Court also noted the Muslims were offering prayer unhindered and offering of puja was confined to the area of cellar. "Are we correct to say that prayers in South (cellar) do not impact (Muslim) prayers In North. If this is correct.. we can say let no further change happen in status quo further. We say let namaz continue and worship in south cellar can continue," CJI Chandrachud said during the hearing..The bench was hearing an appeal filed by the Muslim parties against the Allahabad High Court verdict rejecting the plea challenging a January 31 Varanasi court order by which Hindu parties by way of an interim order were allowed to offer prayers and puja in the southern cellar/basement of the Gyanvapi Mosque.The High Court had observed that there is strong prima facie ( on first impression) evidence to indicate that Hindu prayers were being offered at the site since 1551, until they were stopped in 1993.It had also remarked that it was illegal on the part of the Uttar Pradesh government to stop the Hindu prayers by way of an oral order in 1993..Seeking a stay on the civil court's order, Senior Advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, who represented the Muslim party, submitted that puja was being allowed to take place within the mosque premises."This will only fester some discord. History has taught us some other lessons where violence has happened despite assurances. This is an egregious order," Ahmadi submitted.He further argued that there was an absolute case for stay on the Varanasi court's order."There is a large temple complex beside this... Communities have lived peacefully. Why this insistence on having this now? For 30 years the situation has been very normal," the senior counsel said further.Ahmadi also argued that it would be difficult to restore status quo ante (the previous position) once the prayers by Hindu parties inside the cellar go on for a longer time..However, Ahmadi also urged the Court to pass any order to prevent any further change at the premises in case it was not inclined to stay the complete order at this stage."Because what is happening is three applications are pending now.. there are applications to bar prayers on the upstair area of cellar etc.. Serious apprehension is bit by bit we will lose out the whole mosque," he told the Court.Calling the action of filing multiple applications for different reliefs by Hindu parties before civil court as "salami tactics" - the practice of taking small steps for a larger goal - Ahmadi said,"Bit by bit you are encroaching into our area. So bit by bit we are losing out our own mosque."Ahmadi in his arguments also referred to Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute."We are in your hands and we know what happened at Ayodhya and despite of interim orders the mosque Babri Masjid could not be protected. This is what history taught us...".It was further submitted that the State had implemented the civil court's order with "hot haste" even before it could have been challenged. "State implemented the order within dark hours of the night and puja starts. court gave a week to implement it. I tried at night to approach SC and HC as well. i was asked to move the HC and till then the penny had dropped," Ahmadi submitted.Ahmadi also said the order for puja was passed by the civil court judge on a day he was retiring and that too only on an oral mentioning. "The gates were opened in the dark hours of the night. As Mr Soli Sorabjee [has] said "dark deeds are done at dark hours of night". Does State ordinarily act in such hot haste?".Ahmadi further submitted that a status quo ante of 30 years had been restored by a "mandatory order" and such quick execution of that order was being used to now oppose the demand for stay."This is all within the mosque premises," Ahmadi said.Ahmadi also argued that a mosque cannot be fragmented."This is an entire mosque complex. Mosque complex can be large... temple complex can be even larger so why do they need this space at all...," he submitted.Senior Advocate Shyam Divan, representing the Hindu parties, submitted that the orders under challenge do not warrant any intervention by the top court at this stage."This is not a case for even notice here. this court does not interfere at an interlocutory stage. there are detailed reasons in the trial court and high court order," Divan argued..BackgroundThe matter arises out of an ongoing civil court case involving conflicting claims over the religious character of the Gyanvapi compound.Among other claims, the Hindu side has said that Hindu prayers were earlier offered by the family of one Somnath Vyas in the mosque's cellar until 1993 when the Mulayam Singh Yadav-led government allegedly put an end to it.The Muslim side has opposed this claim and maintained that Muslims have always had possession over the mosque's building.The main dispute over the Gyanvapi compound involves a claim by the Hindu side that a section of an ancient temple on the land was destroyed during the rule of the Mughal emperor Aurangzeb in the 17th century.They have therefore sought direction to pray inside the complex.On the other hand, the Muslim side has maintained that the mosque predated Aurangzeb's reign and that it had endured various alterations over time.The Hindu parties have claimed in their suit that that the Hindu character of the land in question did not change even if the temple structure was later torn down on Mughal emperor Aurangzeb's orders to erect a mosque.They have sought the restoration of the ancient temple (Lord Vishweshwar temple) there, and defended their 1991 suit on the ground that the dispute predated the Places of Worship Act..Follow our detailed coverage of the dispute, here..[Live tweets from today's hearing]