New Delhi: After a Varanasi court on Friday rejected a plea for carbon dating of the 'shivling' inside the Gyanvapi mosque, advocate Vishnu Jain, representing the Hindu side in the case, said the petitioners would approach the Supreme Court.


"Court has rejected our demand of seeking carbon dating. We'll move Supreme Court against this order and challenge it there. I cannot announce the date as of now, but we'll soon challenge this order in Supreme Court," Jain said.


"There's no setback. We want to establish using scientific methods, as soon as possible whether its a 'shivling' or a fountain. District Court has given reference to SC's order, so we'll directly move Supreme Cour and challenge this order," Advocate Subhash Nandan Chaturvedi, representing the Hindu side said. 


The Varanasi District Court on Friday rejected the plea seeking scientific investigation including carbon dating of the purported 'Shivling' that the Hindu petitioners claimed to have found inside the Gyanvapi mosque complex during court-mandated videography of the premises in May this year.


District Court Judge Ajaya Krishna Vishvesha after hearing the matter rejected the demand put forth by the Hindu petitioners. 


As per the order copy accessed by ABP News, the District Court based its decision on the May 16 Supreme Court order which directed to seal the Gyanvapi mosque-Kashi Vishwanath temple complex restricting anyone to enter the premises.  


The arguments over carbon dating and scientific investigation of the Shivling-like structure were completed in the Court during the last hearing on Tuesday after which the Court reserved its order. 


ALSO READ | Gyanvapi Mosque case: Varanasi Court Rejects Hindu Side's Demand For Carbon Dating Of 'Shivling'


During the videography of the mosque premises, the Hindu side said that it found a long stone with a round top close to ‘wazoo khana’ — a small reservoir used by Muslims to perform ritual ablution before offering namaz — and claimed it to be “Shivling”. On the other hand, the Masjid Intezamia Committee said that it was not a Shivling but a part of a fountain.