Bringing down curtains on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid issue, one of the longest-running title disputes in India, the Supreme Court has given the entire disputed 2.77-acre land to the Hindu parties with a trust to be formed by the Centre to monitor the construction of a Ram Temple. The Sunni Wakf Board will be given 5 acres of alternate land, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court ruled in the unanimous verdict. The Nirmohi Akhara also suffered a setback with the court saying it is not a ‘shebait’ or devotee of the deity Ram Lalla. The CJI Ranjan Gogoi-led bench of Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer, said the Akhara’s suit was barred by limitation.
The disputed land in Ayodhya goes to the Hindus in its entirety for the construction of Ram Mandir. The Sunni Waqf Board will get five acres of alternate land, which will be accorded either by the state or the Centre.
Centre will hand over the disputed site to the Board of trustees and a suitable alternative plot of land measuring five acres at Ayodhya will be given to Sunni Waqf Board. In the scheme by Board of trustees, appropriate representation be given to Nirmohi Akhara.
Here’s what the judgement says:
*The Supreme Court said that the 2003 Archaeology Survey of India’s (ASI) report can’t be dismissed as conjecture or just a guess work and junked the theory of pre-existence of an Idgah at the disputed site. “Babri mosque wasn’t constructed on a vacant land. An underlying structure did exist,” it said.
*The SC held that the Allahabad High Court was wrong to divide the land between the three main parties — Ram Lalla Virajman, Nirmohi Akhara and the Sunni Waqf Board — as the complex was a composite whole.
*The entire 2.77 acres will remain with the receiver and will be handed over to a trust to be formed in 3 months to build a temple.
*The Muslims will get alternate land either in the surplus 67 acres acquired in and around the disputed structure by the central govt or any other prominent place.
*Supreme Court of India ruled that the Hindus would get the entire disputed 2.77 acres in Ayodhya.
*Supreme Court rules disputed Ayodhya land will go to Hindus. Masjid side will get an alternate land.
* On balance of probabilities outer courtyard was with Hindus. Muslims havent been able to establish sole possession of inner courtyard. The placing of idols waa a desecration. Muslims have been denied right to worship by demolition. Sc has to remedy this wrong. In a secular nation Muslims will get land to build mosque: SC
*SC: Under our constitution all religions are equal. Constitution does not allow judges to distinguish between them.
*SC: Historical records and travelogue show that the Hindus prayed around the disputed site. But these must be dealt with circumspection. Courts must go by evidence.
*A huge structure like a temple under the Masjid can’t be basis of claiming ownership now: SC
*The Supreme Court has said that there is no evidence of ownership between 13 to 16th centuries.
*Historical records and travelogue show that the Hindus prayed around the disputed site. But these must be dealt with circumspection. Courts must go by evidence: SC
*SC: ASI has not said whether a temple was destroyed to make the mosque. Although the mosque was built on a temple and used its ruins.
*The Shia plea for ownership of the land has been dismissed. It’s a unanimous verdict.
*Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi starts reading the judgement
*The five-judge bench has started signing the judgement inside the courtroom