Gyanvapi leak: Hurting justice

Leaked videos and photos of a survey of the complex put the sensitive case under a cloud

The leak of the photographs and videos of the Gyanvapi mosque complex survey and the resulting frenzy bring the fairness of the entire judicial process to adjudicate the communally sensitive case under a cloud. Coming before the maintainability of the suit, filed by five Hindu women is to be approved, the turn of events breaches the foundational principle of a free and fair hearing.

What can justify the leak of the photos and videos that are being used by a section to propagate a narrative, while the legality of the suit itself is yet to be decided?  (PTI)

The leak came hours after the material was shared with the parties in the case, raising questions about the wisdom of the Varanasi district court in doing so. After all, it was asked categorically by the Supreme Court (SC) to first determine whether the suit is maintainable under the law, and if the chief prayer of giving unhindered access to Hindus to the mosque premises could be entertained at all in the wake of the 1991 Places of Worship Act. Even as it kept the petition filed by the Gyanvapi mosque management committee pending, the SC held on May 20 that the “complexities and sensitivities involved in the matter” would require a “more senior and experienced hand” in the Varanasi district courts to hear it at the first instance. The order added that the district judge shall decide on priority the application of the Gyanvapi mosque management committee, which claims that the case of the Hindu petitioners is barred by the Places of Worship Act, which locks the position or “religious identity” of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947. But the subsequent proceedings before the district judge leave much to be desired – both in terms of law and sensitivities.

What can justify the leak of the photos and videos that are being used by a section to propagate a narrative, while the legality of the suit itself is yet to be decided? When the most basic question is still to be answered by the Varanasi district judge, handing over material to the contesting sides with the propensity of vitiating the entire proceedings and giving rise to communal fervour clearly falls short of the golden principle: Not only must justice be done, it must also be seen to be done.