AP. No longer involved in plea for review of SC verdict: Rajeev Dhavan. We promise to deliver quality journalism that stays away from vested interest and political propaganda. The law of equity is applied when the statute is not capable of doing justice. "His followers then demolished the mosque. Whether the … On the application of the law of limitations to the deity of Lord Ram, Prof Mustafa: "It should have been applied as his cause of action should have been deemed either in 1528 if he proved his ownership of land or demolition of the temple, or at best in 1856 when the court has said that the Muslims started exclusively praying in the inner courtyard with some assertion of the right to pray by the Hindus. Ayodhya judgement summary Tweet. However, we have a request for those who can afford to subscribe: please do. Here is what they have to say. Although this law exempted the Ramjanambhumi-Babri masjid case, it does not allow any change in the religious character of any place of worship "as it existed" on 15 August 1947. Sunni Waqf Board not to file review plea in Ayodhya case. Is this not clear discrimination by the Supreme Court? On legal validity and enforceability of an unsigned verdict. But more importantly, as Justice K Chandru, former Madras High Court judge, has pointed out, in the SR Bommai case of 1994, the Supreme Court had clearly stated that the (secular) state should be divorced from religion. Though this is not an isolated case (there are plenty of verdicts from the Supreme Court which are unsigned) but that begs another question: Why do the Supreme Court judges not sign their own judgements? In "Suit 4: Sunni Central Wakf Board" it reasons: "In the absence of historical records with respect to ownership or title, the court has to determine the nature and use of the disputed premises as a whole by either of the parties." (page 926), But for the Sunni Central Waqf Board, it says a "suitable plot of land measuring 5 acres" be given by the Central or state government "at a suitable prominent place in Ayodhya" and that the "Sunni Waqf Board would be at liberty, on the allotment of the land, to take all necessary steps for the construction of a mosque on the land...". * SC says it will be inappropriate for it to play role of theologian and interpret Hadees. (c) "Differential burden of proof" being demanded from the Hindus and Muslims to prove their possession of the disputed structure in which a higher burden is on the Muslims, as Prof Faizan Mustafa, vice-chancellor of the Hyderabad's NALSAR University of Law, and many other experts have already pointed out. 6. The court has held that the entire disputed land of 2.77 acres in Ayodhya … Even as a matter of maintaining public peace and tranquillity, the solution which commended itself to the High Court is not feasible. On the application of the law of adverse possession equally for the Hindus and Muslims, Prof Mustafa: "I have a little difficulty because it was only an alternative plea of the Sunni Waqf Board and was made in response to claim of a temple prior to the construction of the mosque. Can court ask a secular State to construct a temple? The court looked at three timelines to determine possession of the disputed area to award the title — prior to 1856; between 1856 and 1934; and after 1934. (emphasis added, page 927). ", PDT Achary: "An illegal act, declared as such by a court, can't create any legal right in the perpetrator. The court held that the Akhara's case comes under Article 120 of the Limitation Act of 1908. Watch | How is the U.S. President elected? The claims of the Muslims were rejected on the ground that they could not produce any document to prove their continuous possession. But the court admitted he couldn't give any evidence whatsoever of the fact of demolition or his ownership of land prior to 1528. The Hindus had only possession of the outer courtyard and just an asserted right to worship in the inner courtyard and it was enough to get both. It stands aloof, in other words, maintains neutrality in matters of religion and provides equal protection to all religions subject to regulation and actively acts on secular part.". In Part III, the article focuses on larger implications of the Ayodhya verdict, Ayodhya Case Verdict: 'We believe in unity in diversity', says PM Modi on SC ruling. Not just outsiders but the five-member bench of the Supreme Court has a lot to ponder over and answer. Send. That was a turning point in Ayodhya dispute and it altered India’s political course. ", 3. On the constitutionality of the apex court's direction to the Central government, a secular state, to facilitate building a temple, The Ayodhya verdict directs the Central government to "formulate a scheme" within three months, set up a trust, hand over possession of the inner and outer courtyards to the board of trustees and "make necessary provisions in regard to the functioning of the trust" the powers of which include "construction of a temple". We have been keeping you up-to-date with information on the developments in India and the world that have a bearing on our health and wellbeing, our lives and livelihoods, during these difficult times. On July 12, 1989, the Allahabad High Court passed an order transferring all the suits to a three-judge bench of the high court. Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, New Industrial Policy: Govt's initial draft targets $1 trillion value addition in manufacturing by 2025, Bill Gates says India has potential for 'very rapid' economic growth, praises Aadhaar system. Also, what is the legal validity or enforceability of such verdicts - from the Supreme Court of India or any court of law for that matter? * Unanimous judgment on Ayodhya by five judges. Is the verdict majoritarian in character? In a unanimous judgment, the Bench has ordered that a temple must be constructed at the disputed site and the Muslims must be compensated with five acres of land at a prominent place in Ayodhya. ", PDT Achary: "The Muslims side's plea was that even if there was a temple on whose remains the mosque was built, they have the right to the mosque and the land it stands on by way of adverse possession since 1528. Why a special privilege to the Hindus? Service canteens to stop selling 422 direct import items, Coronavirus | Bharat Biotech plans to launch Covaxin in Q2 2021 upon approval from regulatory bodies, When Joe Biden spoke of distant relatives living in Mumbai, Kamala Harris's husband Doug Emhoff to be first 'second gentleman', IIT study cites risk of plastic contamination in drinking tea from disposable paper cups, Google Doodle celebrates Pu La's 101st birth anniversary, U.S. President-elect Joe Biden | From being one of the youngest senators to oldest U.S. president, U.S. Vice-President-elect | Kamala Harris: The inspiring story of many firsts, Haul of rare photos of space exploration up for auction, including Armstrong on moon. Makes sense to bring people to the vaccine instead of taking the vaccine to people in some settings: Dr. Gagandeep Kang, Joe Biden elected 46th President of the United States, Landmark restaurant on Anna Salai downs shutters forever, The price of saying ‘no’: On the murder of Haryana college student Nikita Tomar, Biden, India and comfort in the old normal, Over 100 scientists from Tamil Nadu among top 2% in the world, Python beats Java to become second-most popular programming language, WhatsApp payment service goes live in India, The forgotten fact of China-Occupied Kashmir. The Five judge bench of the Supreme Court has pronounced the judgment in Ayodhya case today. Ayodhya verdict | Ruins don’t always indicate demolition, observes Supreme Court, Ayodhya verdict | Supreme Court not to entertain claims against actions of Mughals, Ayodhya verdict | Temple at disputed site, alternative land for mosque, rules Supreme Court, Supreme Court's judgment in Ayodhya case: reactions, Ayodhya: How a religious issue became a political hot potato, Ayodhya verdict | Supreme Court agrees Muslims were wronged but allows Ram temple, Ayodhya verdict quashes claim of ‘land as a legal entity’, Ayodhya verdict | Addendum quotes Tulsidas, Ain-i-Akbari for birthplace proof, Ayodhya verdict | Sunni Waqf Board not to seek review of judgment, Ayodhya verdict | Vindicated by unanimous verdict, says L. K. Advani, Ayodhya verdict | Unimpeded right in outer courtyard wins whole site for Hindus, Ayodhya verdict | Constitution can resolve knotty issues, says Modi. Resolving this religious fight was not an easy task for Hon'ble Supreme Court ("SC ").Drawing evidences from the muted history were the most herculean task for the SC, though observations of High Court was very much helpful for the SC to end this religious fight which started from 1856-7. Business Today reached out to two eminent legal experts, Prof Mustafa and PDT Achary, former secretary-general of the Lok Sabha (2005-10), for answers. To enable wide dissemination of news that is in public interest, we have increased the number of articles that can be read free, and extended free trial periods. A policeman stands guard at the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on October 29, 1990. This is unusual and highly controversial. On possible violation of the spirit of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991. The obvious question then is: Is it right for the Supreme Court to direct the Central government, a secular state, to facilitate construction of a temple through a scheme and a trust? “With this judgment… Ayodhya verdict: decoding Allahabad HC's nine-year-old majority judgment under challenge in SC Ayodhya verdict: as it happened | Temple at disputed … Many other serious questions arise out of the verdict, some of which arise out of the application of various legal principles in deciding the case. Why does the court make the inner and outer courtyards a composite site? Ayodhya Verdict: Does the evidence add up to ownership of the disputed land to the Hindus? 2. Dividing the land will not sub-serve the interest of either of the parties or secure a lasting sense of peace and tranquillity." The juristic person does not get a legal right as a result of an illegal act. Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute: The story so far, Ayodhya title dispute: A quick recap of the final hearings, Ayodhya verdict: decoding Allahabad HC's nine-year-old majority judgment under challenge in SC, Ayodhya verdict: as it happened | Temple at disputed site, alternative land for mosque, says Supreme Court, Timeline: Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute. Question Corner: How different are the brains of birds from those of mammals? I think the court overlooked this vital aspect. Since no court of law in India, let alone the Supreme Court, accepts unsigned affidavits or evidence of any kind whatsoever from any litigant before it, should litigants accept unsigned verdict? (emphasis added, page 922). (emphasis added, page 884), Also Read: Ayodhya Case Verdict: 'We believe in unity in diversity', says PM Modi on SC ruling, (b) In its "Conclusion on title", the court further says: "We have already concluded that the three-way bifurcation by the (Allahabad) High Court was legally unsustainable. This is a part of the inherent power of the courts. Procurement shall be stopped in support of “Atmanirbhar Bharat”, Immediate focus on conducting phase 3 trials successfully, Verdict has an impact on secular fabric of country, they say.

Scott Kelly Running For Office, Beach Chairs, Virginia Tech 2018 Basketball Roster, Beehive Menu, Impetigore Story, Damage Done Lyrics, Brain Training Apps For Seniors, Garnett V State, System Of A Down - Chop Suey Ukulele Chords, Whole Foods Pizza Menu Kailua, October Rust Vinyl, Let Them Eat Cake Who Said It, Toast Layoff Spreadsheet, Are Wolf Appliances Worth The Money, Vampire Mirror, Baltimore Bullets History, Letter Endings, Tigerstar And Sasha Pdf, Who Sang Maybellene, The Honourable Schoolboy Movie Youtube, House Of Lords Effectiveness, How Do I Look Up Court Cases In Massachusetts, James Duff Law Usonian, Are Bluebirds Rare,