New Delhi, May 23 (UNI) Lawyer and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay has filed an application before the Supreme Court, seeking direction for impleadment in the Gyanvapi Mosque dispute case, going on in the Apex Court.
Upadhyay, in his Intervention Application (IA) filed before the Supreme Court, said that the Places of Worship Act of 1991 cannot govern the Kashi Vishwanath Temple-Gyanvapi Mosque issue.
Earlier, the BJP leader had filed a petition last year, challenging the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act. The matter is pending before the Supreme Court.
The Public Interest Litigation has challenged the constitutional validity of the Places of Worship Act, in October 2020 and the Court had issued notice on his plea.
Upadhyay stated in his application, "Only those places can be protected, which were erected or constructed in accordance with personal law of the person erected/constructed them, but places erected or constructed in derogation of the personal law, cannot be termed as a 'place of worship'.
"Temple's religious character does not change after the demolition of roof, walls, pillars, foundation and even offering Namaz. After the Pran Pratishtha of idol, A Temple is Always a Temple until the Idol is shifted to another temple with the rituals of Visharjan. Moreover, Religious Character of Temple (Place of Worship) & Mosque (Place of Prayer) is totally different. So, same law can't be applied on both," he added.
Upadhyay has stressed that the SLP filed before the Supreme Court was infructuous as the Places of Worship Act did not bar the determination of religious character. He mentioned in the application that the Act was a penal law, so it must be interpreted literally, not purposively.
"The Mosque constructed at temple land cannot be a Mosque, not only for the reason that such construction is against Islamic law, but also on grounds that the property once vested in the deity continues to be deity's property and right of deity and devotees are never lost, howsoever long illegal encroachment continues on such property. Right to restore back religious property is unfettered and continuing wrong and injury may be cured by judicial remedy," Upadhyay further submitted in his application.
The Supreme Court had on Friday heard the Special Leave Petition (SLP) regarding the Gyanvapi issue and had ordered that the Order 7 Rule 11 Application being tried in the subordinate court of Varanasi, be sent to the District Judge, as the Court was of the opinion that a seasoned hand would be required to handle the matter.
UNI SM RJ