The disputed site in Varanasi.
Credit: PTI File Photo
Varanasi, UP: Arguments were completed on Saturday before a court here on the application seeking a survey through excavation in the entire Gyanvapi complex and an order is likely on the matter on October 25, a lawyer for the Hindu side said here.
The advocates of the Muslim side and the Waqf Board, who are opposing the survey, completed their arguments before Civil Judge Senior Division Jugal Kishore Shambhu, Madan Mohan Yadav, who represents the Hindu said, said.
After hearing the arguments, the court has fixed October 25 as the date of the next hearing, when it may give its order on this matter, Yadav said.
On October 16, the Hindu side had referred to the expertise of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) in excavations to buttress its plea to carry out excavations in the Gyanvapi complex.
Civil Judge Shambhu after hearing the arguments had posted the hearing on October 19.
The Muslim side lawyers had submitted before the court that when the Hindu side has appealed to agitate the case in the high court and Supreme Court, there was no point arguing the matter in the trial court.
They also submitted that when the ASI survey of the Gyanvapi complex had been done once already, there was no justification for conducting another survey.
The lawyers had also stated that digging a pit in the mosque premises for the survey was not practical in any way and could damage the mosque.
Previously, the Hindu side had argued that the original place of "Jyotirlinga" was in the centre, under the dome located in the Gyanvapi complex, and that the first survey was incomplete.
Following a July 21, 2023, order of the district court, the ASI carried out a scientific survey of the Gyanvapi premises, located next to the Kashi Vishwanath temple here, to determine whether the mosque was constructed over a pre-existing structure of a Hindu temple.
The ASI had submitted its survey report to the district court in a sealed cover on December 18.
The survey was ordered by the court after the Hindu petitioners claimed the 17th-century mosque was constructed over a pre-existing temple.