Case Summary: Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Rakhi Singh and Others

The High Court’s order dismissing the appeal against an order of the District Judge directing an archaeological survey of the area in which the Gyanvapi Mosque is situated.

Case Summary: Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Rakhi Singh and Others

Citation:

[2023] 11 S.C.R. 108 : 2023 INSC 702

Case Details:

  • Petitioner: Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi
  • Respondents: Rakhi Singh and Others
  • Case Type: Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No.31345 of 2023
  • Judgment Date: August 04, 2023
  • Bench: Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud CJI, J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra JJ.

Issue Under Consideration:

The High Court’s order dismissing the appeal against an order of the District Judge directing an archaeological survey of the area in which the Gyanvapi Mosque is situated.

  • Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Application u/s.75(c) and Order XXVI r.10A.
  • Places of Worship (Special Provision) Act, 1991.

Relevant Case Laws and Citations:

  • M Siddiq (Dead) Through Legal Representatives v. Mahant Suresh Das and Others (2020) 1 SCC 1 : [2019] 18 SCR 1
  • Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Rakhi Singh and Others SLP (C) No 11351 of 2023
  • Mohd Aslam Alias Bhure v. Union of India and Others (1994) 2 SCC 48 – referred to.

Summary of the Case:

The petitioner challenged the order of the High Court that affirmed the District Judge’s direction for an archaeological survey of the Gyanvapi Mosque area. The respondents had filed a suit seeking a declaration to perform rituals of deities allegedly present within the mosque premises. The District Judge directed the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to conduct a non-invasive scientific survey of the property.

Court’s Analysis and Judgment:

  • The Supreme Court, while affirming the High Court’s decision, specified that the survey should be conducted without excavation or destruction of the property, using non-invasive methods.
  • The Court clarified that the ASI’s report and scientific investigation would assist the trial court in resolving the dispute but would not amount to a substantive finding on the matters in dispute.
  • The Supreme Court reiterated the High Court’s direction that no excavation at the site or destruction of the structure shall occur.

Significance:

This judgment is significant in balancing the requirements of a scientific investigation in a sensitive religious matter, ensuring that the survey is conducted without harming the existing structures. It highlights the court’s role in navigating complex disputes involving historical and religious claims.

  • For understanding the implications of the Places of Worship Act, 1991 in similar contexts, refer to the case analysis of M Siddiq (Dead) Through Legal Representatives v. Mahant Suresh Das and Others on Legal-Wires.
  • To explore the legal nuances of archaeological surveys in disputed religious sites, visit our detailed article on Mohd Aslam Alias Bhure v. Union of India and Others at Legal-Wires.

Conclusion:

Committee of Management Anjuman Intezamia Masajid Varanasi v. Rakhi Singh and Others is a pivotal case in the context of archaeological surveys in religiously sensitive sites. The Supreme Court’s directives ensure a careful and non-invasive approach to the scientific study of the area, maintaining the sanctity of the site while addressing the legal dispute. This case sets a precedent for handling similar matters involving historical and religious significance.

242e63e0716c38c3089a61e1735cc4957be0bd6a14b4d75411e7f62c92a6dfab1700912699Download

Case Study: Rabindra Kumar Chhatoi v. State of Odisha & Anr.
In Rabindra Kumar Chhatoi v. State of Odisha, the Supreme Court ruled that the backyard of a private house does not qualify as a "public view" under Section 3(1)(x) of the SC/ST Act, discharging the appellant from charges of caste-based abuse and related IPC offences.
Case Study: Nalin Choksey v. Commissioner of Customs, Kochi
Case Study: Nalin Choksey v. Commissioner of Customs, Kochi
In Nalin Choksey v. Commissioner of Customs, the SC held that subsequent purchasers aren't liable for customs duty evasion by importers. It ruled that liability arises at importation, not ownership transfer, and set aside duties imposed on the appellant.
Case Study: State of NCT of Delhi v. Mohd. Jabir
Case Study: State of NCT of Delhi v. Mohd. Jabir
The Supreme Court in State of NCT of Delhi v. Mohd. Jabir upheld procedural compliance under Section 50 NDPS Act, ruling that using "any" instead of "nearest" Gazetted Officer doesn’t invalidate the search if substantive rights aren’t prejudiced. Bail was revoked.
Or
Powered by Lit Law
New Chat
Sources

Ask AI