Gyanvapi survey video leaked, aired on TV; petitioners say will return report

Controversy deepens around the Varanasi Gyanvapi Masjid case as video footage and photographs of the survey carried inside the complex, earlier this month were reportedly leaked. The leaked video and photographs were reportedly aired on some news channels and circulated on social media on Monday.

The video of the survey report was leaked shortly after the completion of the hearing in the court and started being aired on television. The Varanasi district court on Monday gave copies of the videos and photographs of the report to the petitioners and respondents of the case. This was given on a condition that they will not misuse the videos and not make them public.

Read | Meet Ajay Krishna Vishwesha, Varanasi district judge hearing Gyanvapi case

Despite this, soon after the four women petitioners received the survey report in sealed packets, the purported videos of the commission's survey appeared in the media. Hari Shankar Jain, the lawyer for the Hindu side, said that they had not even opened the survey report yet and it was being aired on television channels.

"The envelopes of the survey reports are kept sealed with us," the lawyer said. He also showed the sealed envelopes. The lawyer said that it has to be found out from where the video has been leaked. He said that a complaint will be lodged in the court on Tuesday in the matter of video leak and the court will have to fix the responsibility of the perpetrator.

On the other hand, after the hearing on Monday, the Varanasi distric court gave July 4 as the next date of hearing. This date has been given due to the summer holidays in the courts from June 1.

What happened in the court?

During the hearing, there was a fierce debate in the court between the Hindu side and the Muslim side. During this, the Muslim side kept its arguments. They argued that the matter related to Maa Shringar Gauri is not worthy of hearing. Abhay Yadav, the lawyer for the Muslim side, presented the arguments. Heated argument were exchanged between the two sides in the court.

Lawyer Abhay Yadav claimed that the case of Maa Shrigar Gauri is a complete violation of the Place of Worship (Special Provisions) Act 1991. The Muslim side also read the judgment in the case of 1937 Din Mohammad Vs Secretary of State.

They argued that the court had decided on the basis of oral testimony and documents that this entire complex belongs to Muslim Waqf. He said that the claim of the Hindu side that this property does not belong to the Waqf is wrong. 

Judge got angry

During this, several times there was a heated argument between both the sides and the voice was heard even outside the court. Initially the district judge appealed to both the parties to remain calm. But the matter progressed and the voices of both the sides got louder. After this the judge got angry and asked both the parties not to talk in loud voice. After which they became calm.