The ancient city of Varanasi has been in the news for a while, but this time it's not for its spiritual aura or its ghats by the river Ganges. On the 9th of August, the Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee, responsible for the management of the mosque at the contested Gyanvapi site, approached the Court of District Judge. They lodged an application demanding an immediate halt to the Archaeological Survey of India's (ASI) ongoing exploration of the Gyanvapi area.

You might be thinking, “Why is this happening?” Well, it dates back to an earlier mandate. The Varanasi Court, on the 21st of July, had sanctioned the ASI survey based on a request filed by four plaintiffs. Their aim was to worship Shringar Gauri, a deity, at the disputed location. The mosque committee, however, has now alleged that these plaintiffs haven't held up their end of the bargain. According to the committee, the plaintiffs were supposed to cover the costs of the ASI exploration, as dictated by Rule 70 of the General Civil Rule. They argue that this hasn't been done, leading them to seek an intervention from the court to put a stop to the survey.

To add to the plot, the committee has expressed concerns over the manner in which the survey is being conducted. They point out that no proper intimation, neither written nor verbal, has been provided regarding the survey's schedule. Their contention is that the ASI seems to be moving forward without following due process. Given these discrepancies, their primary plea is to cease the survey until things are set right.

Now, here's where it gets more intricate. Those advocating for the Hindu perspective have until the 17th of August to present their counter-arguments or objections to the mosque committee's claims.

For those not in the loop, the ASI's exploration at Gyanvapi isn't just a random endeavor. This has been the sixth consecutive day of their scientific survey. Following the green light from the Varanasi District Judge on the 21st of July, and after the Allahabad High Court and Supreme Court denied the mosque committee's appeal against this decision, the ASI was handed the task. Their mission? To uncover whether the structure, currently identified as a 'Mosque', stands atop an older Hindu temple.

Rumors and claims are rife, with the Hindu faction suggesting that the ASI's teams have already made significant discoveries. If their statements are anything to go by, on the 5th of August, the team unearthed relics that resonate with Hindu temple designs – like a 2-foot Trishul (a trident), five Kalash (sacred urns), and remnants of a 4-foot idol.

But here's another twist: If you're hoping to see this on your evening news, you might be disappointed. On that very day, the 9th of August, the Varanasi court decreed that media personnel are prohibited from reporting live from the Gyanvapi site. Moreover, members of the ASI survey team have been instructed to maintain a tight lip, refraining from sharing any comments with the press.

District Judge A K Vishvesh, reacting to a petition from the Gyanvapi management committee, championed this media blackout. As Madan Mohan Yadav, a lawyer representing the Hindu faction present at the hearing, explained, the court has advised restraint in reporting on the issue, especially on platforms like social media, to prevent any potential disturbances to the peace.

So, as the sacred city continues to be a focal point of religious debate, it reminds us of the intricate tapestry of India's historical and cultural narrative.