On Friday a Varanasi court rejected the plea for carbon dating of what is claimed to be a ‘shivling’ in the Gyanvapi mosque premises. The Hindu side will approach the Supreme Court against the Varanasi court’s verdict.
Government counsel Rana Sanjiv Singh said District Judge AK Vishvesha turned down the Hindu petitioners’ plea seeking scientific investigation and carbon dating of the ‘shivling’, citing Supreme Court directives for its safe keeping so that no tampering can be done.
What is carbon dating?
Carbon dating technique is used to determine the age of an archaeological object. The history of the object and the evolutionary process it goes through plays a vital role in understanding it.
The Hindu side had claimed that a ‘Shivling’ was found in the premises near the ‘wazukhana’ during the videography survey of the mosque premises, which was ordered by the court. However, the Muslim side said that the structure found was a ‘fountain’. The Hindu side had then submitted an application on September 22 that sought a carbon dating of the object they claimed to be ‘Shivling’.
Earlier on September 29, the Hindu side demanded a scientific investigation of the ‘Shivling’ by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and the carbon dating of ‘Argha’ and the area around it. Akhlaq Ahmed, representing the Muslim side had said that the plea by the Hindu side is not maintainable as it is against the order of the Supreme Court that stated protecting the structure (which the Muslim side claims to be a fountain and the Hindu side claims to be a Shivling).
The Muslim side lawyer Akhlaq Ahmed, earlier while speaking on the Hindu side’s plea seeking carbon dating of structure claimed to be a ‘Shivling’ by the former, said that the plea by the Hindu side is not maintainable as it is against the order of the top court that stated protecting the “structure”.
Ahmed told ANI, “We responded to the application on carbon dating. Stone does not have the capacity to absorb carbon. The Supreme Court in its May 17 order, according to which, the object that was found by the commission, had to be protected. The order of the SC will prevail, so the object cannot be opened… We will take action based on the order by the court on October 14.”
