The Allahabad High Court has asked the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) about the demand for carbon dating of alleged Shivling that was recovered from the Gyanvapi mosque complex in Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh.

The case in question pertains to the demand for scientific survey through carbon dating of alleged Shivling recovered from Gyanvapi campus of Varanasi.

The Hearing on the matter pertaining to the petition seeking carbon dating of Shivling, was adjourned today.

The Allahabad High Court has given ASI time till April 17, for filing the response on the matter.

During the last hearing, the court had asked the archeological Survey of India to file a reply within two weeks.

The high court had also asked ASI if carbon dating can be done without causing damage to the structure. as there were apprehensions that the alleged Shivling might get damaged by carbon dating. 

The high court had received a petition demanding a scientific survey of the alleged Shivling which the Hindu side claims was there before the mosque.

A petition was filed by the Hindu side against the lower court’s decision which did not allow to proceed with carbon dating of the alleged Shivling. 

The application was earlier dismissed by the Varanasi District Judge demanding carbon dating on October 14, 2022. The petitioners have challenged the dismissal by the judge in the high court.

The Supreme Court has said that the plea filed by the Hindu parties asking for extension of the order for protecting the object found during a survey conducted at the Gyanvapi Mosque.

Bench headed by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, was told about the matter today by Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain. The CJI said that a bench shall be constituted to hear the matter at 3pm tomorrow.

Advocate Vishnu Jain apprised the bench that the order which was protecting the Shivling found was due to expire on November 12.

Advocate Jain also mentioned that the Order 7 Rule 11 (rejection of plaints) application filed by the Muslim parties was rejected.

A plea was filed in Varanasi Court by the Hindu for giving directions to the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for conducting scientific investigation to ascertain whether the object found during the survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque premises was a Shivling or a fountain which as rejected.This prompted an appeal before the Allahabad High Court.

Last week the ASI director was asked to submit his opinion on whether carbon dating, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), excavation and other methods to determine the age of the disputed object at Gyanvapi mosque, would damage the object.

The matter pertaining to Gyanvapi dispute arose as the devotees of Hindu belief approached civil court to be permitted to worship inside the premises of the Gyanvapi Mosque, on the ground that it was a Hindu temple and still houses Hindu deities.

A survey was ordered by the civil court, based on which, the Hindu parties claimed that an object discovered at the site is a Shivling. The Muslim parties, however, disputed the same and said that it is only a water fountain.

The Allahabad High Court has directed to present the petition on November 21 for hearing on the petition seeking  conducting a scientific investigation including carbon dating of the Gyanvapi Masjid complex and notices have been issued to the opposition including the state government.

A Single Bench of Justice J.J Munir passed this order while hearing a Criminal Revision filed by Smt Laxmi Devi and 3 Otrs.

The revisionists’ who are plaintiffs of Original Suit, instituted for the purposes of enforcing the right to Darshan, Pooja, and all rituals of Maa Shringar Gauri, Lord Ganesha, Lord Hanuman and other visible and invisible deities situate at Settlement Plot, area and ward of Police Station Dashashwamedh Ghat, District Varanasi, have come up against the order of the District Judge, Varanasi dated 14.10.2022, rejecting their application.

By the said application made under Order XXVI Rule 10(a) read with Section 151 CPC, the plaintiff-revisionists have sought the following material reliefs:-

“A) To make appropriate survey or undertake Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and/or excavation associating the petitioners to find out the nature of construction beneath the Shivlingam discovered on 16.05.2022 in the proceeding held by Advocate Commissioner at Settlement Plot No 9130 within the area of Ward and P.S Chowk, District Varanasi.

B) To make scientific investigation by carbon dating or otherwise to determine the age, nature and other constituents of the Shiva Lingam as discovered on 16.05.2022 in the proceedings held by the Advocate Commissioner at Settlement Plot No 9130 within the area of Ward and P.S Chowk, District Varanasi in accordance with the provisions of The Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and submit report in Court within the time provided by the Court.“

This prayer came to be made as a sequel to the find by the Advocate Commissioner, who had earlier been appointed where the Commissioner reported that a black stone structure was discovered submerged under water, which the plaintiffs said was a Shivlingam.

The Advocate Commissioner opined that the find looks the way generally a big Shivling does. The applicant further seeks opinion of the Archaeological Survey of India through the issue of a Commission for scientific investigation to determine the age, nature and other constituents of the Shivling, employing methods such as Carbon Dating, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Excavation.

The District Judge, Varanasi has rejected the aforesaid application primarily on the ground that the find by the Advocate Commissioner, which the plaintiffs claim to be a Shivlingam is required to be protected in terms of the Supreme Court’s order dated 20.05.2022. The scientific examination sought may damage it.

Hari Shankar Jain, Advocate along with Vishnu Shankar Jain, Counsel appearing for the Revisionists submitted that the order impugned is bad in law because it is based on a priori reasoning that a scientific investigation of the Shivling, claimed by the plaintiffs would lead to its damage and that would violate the Supreme Court’s order.

They urged that there is no basis to this apprehension because whether the Carbon Dating, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) and Excavation would indeed damage it can only be judged, based upon the opinion by the Archaeological Survey of India and not by assumption or conjecture.

The Court issued notice to the respondents. Necessary notices shall be handed over by the office to the Counsel for the Revisionists indicating that the Revision shall be listed on 21.11.2022.

In the meantime, the Court directed the Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi, submit his opinion whether investigation of the structure found at site, subject matter of Original Suit if examined through the methods of Carbon Dating, Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR), Excavation and other methods adopted to determine its age, nature and other relevant information is likely to damage it or a safe evaluation about its age can be done.

“Let the said report be submitted by the Director General, Archaeological Survey of India, New Delhi by the next date fixed through the Registry.

In view of the assertion made by Hari Shankar Jain, Advocate at the Bar that the District Judge, Varanasi is proceeding with the suit and that may affect adversely the outcome of any possible scientific investigation by the Archaeological Survey of India, it is directed that the District Judge, Varanasi will fix a date in the suit in the first week of December, 2022′, the order reads.

A Varanasi court on Friday rejected the petition filed by Hindu worshippers, seeking carbon dating and other scientific tests of the structure found inside the Gyanvapi Mosque complex, which they claimed to be a Shivling.

District Judge A.K. Vishvesha cited the Supreme Court order, which had directed sealing of the place where the Shivling was found. He observed that in light of the Apex Court verdict, no scientific investigation could be allowed.

The Hindu side had claimed that the carbon dating would have been instrumental in determining the age of the structure, which was found in the Wazookhana or reservoir of the Mosque during the survey work on May 16.

The Anjuman Intezamia Mosque Committee, which has been managing the Gyanvapi Mosque for several years, had raised objection to the plea moved by the Hindu worshippers, calling the structure in question as fauvara (fountain). 

The Hindu side had contended that the object discovered at the site after survey by an Advocate Commissioner was a Shivling, an object of worship for Hindu devotees and has been existing within the premises in question since time immemorial.

They argued that with the aim to do complete justice and provide a remedy to a large number of Lord Shiv worshippers, it was necessary that the Court directed the ASI to find the nature and age of the same.

The plea further contended that for proper adjudication of the case, it was necessary that a scientific investigation was made regarding the length, width, height, age, make-up and constituents of the Shivling.

The Varanasi court had, on October 7, deferred its order to October 11 after the Anjuman Intezamia Mosque Committee sought time to respond to two clarifications raised by the Court:

These were:

a) Whether the Shiva Linga (reported to be found) inside the Gyanvapi Mosque premises was a part of suit property or not?

b) Does the court have power to direct ‘scientific investigation’ of the alleged structure?

Representing the Hindu devotees (plaintiffs), Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain had contended that the Shivalinga (reported to be found) was a part of the suit property.

To the second query of the Court, Jain had said that by virtue of Order 26 Rule 10A of the Civil Procedure Code 1908, the Court had the power to direct ‘scientific investigation’ of Shivling reportedly found in the Gyanvapi Mosque premises during the survey.

The Gyanvapi dispute started when Hindu devotees approached a civil court claiming the right to worship inside the premises of Gyanvapi Mosque on the ground that it was a Hindu temple and still housed Hindu deities.

The civil court ordered a survey of the Mosque by an Advocate Commissioner, who conducted a videographed survey and submitted a report to the civil court.

The Supreme Court transferred the suit before the civil court to the District Judge on May 20, in view of the sensitivity of the issue involved.

On September 12, the District Court ruled that the suit was not barred under the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991.

The Hindu parties then moved the present application before the Court seeking carbon dating.

A petition has been filed in the District Court of Varanasi seeking carbon-dating of the alleged structure, said to be a Shivling, found during the survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque Complex in May this year.

Filed by Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain, the petition urged District and Sessions Judge of Varanasi, Dr. Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha, to exercise his powers conferred under Sections 75E and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) and appoint a committee of experts from the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) for carbon dating of the Shivling.

The petitioner sought direction to the Commission to conduct excavation of ground beneath the structure by ground penetrating radar (GPR), so as to find out the nature of the structure found during the ASI survey on May 16.

The plea further sought carbon dating or scientific investigation of the structure by ASI, so as to determine the age, nature and other facts about it, in accordance with provisions of the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act, 1958 and submit report within given time frame.

The petition has been filed in the Court of District and Sessions Judge of Varanasi, Dr. Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha, who had earlier given verdict on na petition seeking permission to worship Mata Shringar Gauri inside the Gyanvapi Mosque Complex.