BREAKINGNEWS: Ayodhya verdict: Trust for building temple for Hindus, alternative land for Muslims for mosque
New Delhi/IBNS: In a crucial judgement apparently in favour of the Hindus but widely hailed as balanced, the Supreme Court on Saturday asked the Indian government to set up a trust within three months to decide on the disputed Ayodhya land for the Hindus to build a temple, while they asked for a five acre land for the Muslims to construct a mosque in a prominent alternative location.
Inner and outer land should be given to the trust, the court said in the 70-year-old legal dispute. In a unamimous judgement, the Sunni Wakf Board was given 5 acres of alternate land.
The disputed land now goes effectively in possession of the Indian government.
The Supreme Court verdict was delivered by a five-member Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. The other judges are Justice SA Bobde, Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice Abdul Nazeer.
Security has been beefed up across the nation as the Supreme Court verdict was awaited eagerly on the Ram Janma Bhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute in Ayodhya. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has appealed for peace and harmony ahead of the judgement.
UNI Photo: Security forces deployed near Hanuman Ghari in Ayodhya on Saturday.
The apex court dismissed the claims of the Shia Waqf Board’ while the Nirmohi Akhara has also suffered a jolt.
The court said the judgement is based on the basis of Constitution and the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and not on based of faith. The court rejected the demoliton of the disputed structure or the Babri Masjid in 1992.
The court also rejected the event of 1949 when Hindu activists had surreptitiously placed idols of Rama inside the mosque.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted in reaction: "This decision of the Supreme Court is important for several reasons: It shows how important it is to follow the legal process in resolving a dispute. Each side was given enough time and opportunity to present its arguments. The temple of justice resolved the decades-old case amicably."
सà¥à¤ªà¥à¤°à¥€à¤® कोरà¥à¤Ÿ का यह फैसला कई वजहों से महतà¥à¤µà¤ªà¥‚रà¥à¤£ है:
— Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) November 9, 2019
यह बताता है कि किसी विवाद को सà¥à¤²à¤à¤¾à¤¨à¥‡ में कानूनी पà¥à¤°à¤•à¥à¤°à¤¿à¤¯à¤¾ का पालन कितना अहम है।
हर पकà¥à¤· को अपनी-अपनी दलील रखने के लिठपरà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤ªà¥à¤¤ समय और अवसर दिया गया।
नà¥à¤¯à¤¾à¤¯ के मंदिर ने दशकों पà¥à¤°à¤¾à¤¨à¥‡ मामले का सौहारà¥à¤¦à¤ªà¥‚रà¥à¤£ तरीके से समाधान कर दिया।
Welcoming the verdict, Union Home Minister Amit Shah said, "I fully believe the historic judgement passed by the Supreme Court will pave the way for the unity. The judgement will lead to India's unity."
Union Minister Nitin Gadkari in one of the intital reactions said: "The verdict should be respected and everyone should maintain peace."
Sunni Waqaf Board counsel Zafaryab Jilani in his reaction said: "We respect the judgement but we are not satisfied, We will decide further course of action. We will later decide if we go for review or not. I can say the judgement is not as per our expectation. I appeal all for peace."
After the verdict amid fears of law and order maintenance Collector & DM of Ayodhya Anuj K Jha tweeted: "Congratulations everybody on a peaceful resolution of a longstanding dispute. I will urge everybody to observe restraint in celebrating the verdict. Any inciting or insulting behaviour will be acted against."
Congratulations everybody on a peaceful resolution of a longstanding dispute. I will urge everybody to observe restraint in celebrating the verdict. Any inciting or insulting behaviour will be acted against.
— Anuj K Jha (@anujias09) November 9, 2019
UNI adds: The hearing was the case is second-longest in the history of Independent India, after the Keshvananda Bharti case continued for 68 days.
In 2010, Allahabad High Court, in its verdict had divided the disputed 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya equally among Ram Lala, the Nirmohi Akhra and Sunni Waqf Board.
The case went to the Apex Court after pleas were filed challenging the High Court verdict.
Hindus argued was that the Lord Ram was born exactly where Babri Masjid was built—demolished by the karsevaks in December 1992. They also claimed that the place has a special significance for the Hindus.
The Muslim side argued that they had executive title over the land and sought restoration of property of what it is was prior to December 1992.
The Apex Court said the Muslim parties have not been able to exhibit possessory claim to inner courtyard while the Hindus were able to prove unimpeded possession of the outer courtyard.
Existence of structure before mosque can't alone be basis of title claim, the Top Court said.
On Archaeological Survey of India report, the Apex Court said, "Adequate material in ASI reports conclude the mosque was not built on vacant land, Babri was built on underlying structure which was not Islamic structure.".
Reaction from Congress
Congress has put up a tweet saying, "Today the Supreme Court's judgement has respected the faith & trust of the people..."
Today the Supreme Court's judgement has respected the faith & trust of the people. Congress President Smt. Sonia Gandhi during the Congress Working Committee meeting passed the resolution on the matter of Ayodhya & construction of Ram Mandir.
— Congress Live (@INCIndiaLive) November 9, 2019
It added, "We appeal to all the parties concerned and to all communities to abide by the secular values and spirit of fraternity enshrined in our Constitution and to maintain peace and harmony."
"We appeal to all the parties concerned and to all communities to abide by the secular values and spirit of fraternity enshrined in our Constitution and to maintain peace and harmony."
— Congress Live (@INCIndiaLive) November 9, 2019
Support Our Journalism
We cannot do without you.. your contribution supports unbiased journalism
IBNS is not driven by any ism- not wokeism, not racism, not skewed secularism, not hyper right-wing or left liberal ideals, nor by any hardline religious beliefs or hyper nationalism. We want to serve you good old objective news, as they are. We do not judge or preach. We let people decide for themselves. We only try to present factual and well-sourced news.