Parties rejected mediation proposal in Gyanvapi, Krishna Janmabhoomi and Sambhal Masjid dispute, SC sent special Lok Adalat
Varanasi/Mathura/Sambhal. Efforts to find an out-of-court settlement of disputes related to three major religious places in Uttar Pradesh have failed to gain momentum. In the Gyanvapi, Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah and Shahi Jama Masjid cases, the parties are insisting that the cases should be decided by the courts only.
The Supreme Court has launched the ‘Supreme Court Action for Mediation and Harmonious Resolution of Disputes’ (Samdhaan Function) across the country to encourage amicable resolution of pending cases through mediation ahead of the Special Lok Adalat to be held on August 21, 22 and 23. As part of this initiative, parties have been asked to explore the possibility of amicable resolution of several pending cases.
Hindu side adamant on decision on Gyanvapi case on legal basis
Madan Mohan Yadav, lawyer for the Hindu side in the Gyanvapi case, said that the Supreme Court had asked both the parties to appear before the mediation center of the Varanasi court on July 14 to explore a possible solution. However, Yadav said that the Hindu side wants the dispute to be decided on legal basis only. He said, “We have decided that the temple is ours and the Muslim side is the encroachment. The mosque side should vacate the premises so that a grand Kashi Vishwanath temple can be built at the original Jyotirlinga site.
On the other hand, Mohammad Yasin, secretary of Anjuman Intejamia Masjid Committee, said that thousands of similar disputes are pending across the country and it is doubtful whether mediation will yield any solution. He said that the committee is still considering whether to participate in the mediation process or not. Background of the dispute: Gyanvapi’s case is going on in the civil court in Varanasi. The Hindu side claims that this mosque was built in the 17th century after Mughal emperor Aurangzeb demolished parts of the ancient temple. At the same time, the Muslim side says that this mosque dates back to the reign of Aurangzeb and is a valid Waqf property.
Sambhal Jama Masjid controversy
In the Sambhal Shahi Jama Masjid-Harihar Temple dispute, the mosque committee’s lawyer Shakeel Ahmed Warsi said that the issue is related to religious faith and is so sensitive that it cannot be resolved by any compromise. Warsi said, “This is a sensitive matter related to Hindus, Muslims and religious beliefs. Whether it is a temple or a mosque should be decided not by mutual agreement but by the court.
‘This sensitive issue cannot be resolved through compromise’
He said the Muslim side had informed the court that though anyone can request intervention in the proceedings, such efforts should not be motivated by ill intentions as the case pertains to a religious place. At the same time, Hindu side’s lawyer Gopal Sharma said that he is not aware of any proposal for mediation in the Sambhal case. Background of the dispute: Hindu petitioners allege that the 16th century Jama Masjid was built on the site of an ancient Hari-Har temple, while the Muslim side has always denied this claim.
Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Royal Eidgah controversy
In the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Eidgah dispute, the mediation proceedings held before the District Legal Services Authority in Mathura earlier this month failed as no representative of the Muslim side attended the meeting, said lawyer Hareram Tripathi of the Hindu side. Both the parties were invited twice to participate in the conciliation process but the Muslim side did not attend, following which the mediation proceedings were discontinued.
Muslim side did not reach the meeting
According to Tripathi, the Shri Krishna Janmabhoomi Trust had proposed that if the Muslim side gives up its claim on the disputed site, the trust can consider giving land for the construction of a mosque elsewhere. He said the Muslim side has conveyed that it is not willing to resolve the dispute through arbitration and preferred decision through regular court proceedings.
The Allahabad High Court has fixed July 17 for further proceedings in the case, while the Supreme Court is likely to hear it during a special Lok Adalat in August under the mediation initiative. An attempt was made to contact Tanveer Ahmed, secretary of the Shahi Eidgah Arrangements Committee and lawyer for the Muslim side, for comment on the matter, but no response was received. Hindu litigant Mahendra Pratap Singh clarified that the Hindu side kept saying before the court that the disputed site was the birthplace of Lord Krishna and they would pursue the case only through the judicial process.
Comments are closed.