Allahabad High Court refused to stay Scientific Investigation in Gyan Vapi Dispute
In a groundbreaking judgment, the High Court upheld the limited scope of interference under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, while allowing the order for a scientific investigation in a contentious places of worship dispute , permissible extent of the High Court’s powers and the utilization of scientific expertise in resolving disputes.
The court clarified that its power of judicial review under Article 227 is not akin to acting as an appellate body or reevaluating facts. It emphasized that interference is justified only in cases of grave injustice or flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law. The judgment stated, “Interference warranted in cases of flagrant abuse of fundamental principles of law or when the order has resulted in grave injustice” (Para 10).
The court also highlighted the importance of scientific investigation in resolving complex disputes. It cited Order XXVI Rule 10A of the Code of Civil Procedure, stating that the purpose of scientific investigation is to secure evidence in disputes. The judgment noted, “Purpose is to secure evidence in dispute – Court may issue a commission for scientific investigation if necessary or expedient in the interest of justice” (Para 12).
Regarding the applicability of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, the court clarified that the subject matter was not argued by the parties in the court below. The ruling read, “The Act’s applicability not argued by parties in the Court below” (Para 9).
The court further underlined that the lower court’s order could only be interfered with if it is found to be perverse or patently erroneous and contrary to the factual and legal position on record. The judgment emphasized, “No evidence of perversity or patent error in the lower court’s findings” (Para 15).
The court ordered a scientific investigation by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to be conducted in a non-destructive manner. The ASI’s expertise in scientific investigation was deemed essential to provide an impartial report. The judgment stated, “Investigation to be non-destructive and without damage to existing structures – ASI’s expertise in scientific investigation” (Para 20).
Ultimately, the court upheld the order for a scientific investigation, aiming to aid the trial court in reaching a just decision. The commission’s findings were expected to be beneficial to all parties involved. The judgment concluded, “Commission’s findings to be beneficial to all parties and aid the trial court in reaching a just decision – No grounds for interference under Article 227 of the Constitution” (Para 21).
Date of Decision: 03 August 2023
C/M Anjuman Intezamia vs Smt. Rakhi Singh And 8 Others
