A new Mandir battle begins

The case was transferred from a lower court where it was being heard up until the Supreme Bench assigned it to the Varanasi district judge's court in May.

The Varanasi civil judge's case would be heard by a senior and seasoned member of the UP judicial service, following the Supreme Court's directive, "keeping in mind the intricacy and sensitivity of the situation."

The Varanasi civil court had ordered the recording of the Gyanvapi mosque a month prior to the Supreme Court's involvement in the issue, based on the plea by the Hindu ladies who contend there are idols of Hindu Gods and goddesses in the Gyanvapi mosque compound.

The Varanasi court was subsequently given a report on the filming at the mosque under seal, but just hours later, the Hindu petitioners controversially made the information public.

According to the story, a "Shivling" had been discovered in a mosque compound pond that was used for "Wazoo" or purifying procedures prior to Muslim prayers. The sealing of this pond.

The Gyanvapi mosque committee filed a lawsuit against this filming inside the historically significant mosque with the Supreme Court.

The petitioners claimed that the filming violated the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which upholds any place of worship's standing as a religious institution as of August 15, 1947.

According to the mosque committee, "Such petitions and shutting of mosques will lead to public mischief and communal division, will damage mosques around the country."

Brahmastra box office day 5 collection: Ranbir Kapoor, Alia Bhatt film sees slight drop, earns ₹155 crore in India