Ayodhya verdict in Supreme Court LIVE Updates: A bench-headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra had reserved the verdict on July Ayodhya verdict updates: The Supreme Court on Thursday ruled in a majority judgement that the mosque-namaz case need not be referred to. Ayodhya Case: The Supreme Court verdict ended with majority, Justice Ashok Bhushan, who read out the judgement for himself and the.

Author: Tuk Daijar
Country: Mali
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Environment
Published (Last): 3 August 2018
Pages: 361
PDF File Size: 9.84 Mb
ePub File Size: 6.17 Mb
ISBN: 479-2-88523-695-1
Downloads: 19050
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Faer

Stay with us for live updates. Supreme Court Judgement and Commentaries. Centre for Policy Studies.

Supreme Court Ayodhya verdict: SC refuses to refer Ayodhya land dispute case to a larger bench

The title suit case would only arise after this challenge is cleared by the seven judge bench. Rajya Sabha adjourned till January 2 after uproar over Triple Talaq bill. Inthe Mughal king Babur invaded north India, and conquered a substantial part of northern India.

The verdict on the case is expected around 2 pm. However, the fact that CJI Misra led bench might send the verdict for reconsideration would mean that the SC agrees that there might be a possibility that Namaz in mosque may be integral to Islam. Lala Sita Ram of Ayodhya, who had access to the older edition inwrote, “The faqirs answered that they would bless him if he promised to build a mosque after demolishing the Janmasthan temple.

Suits are to be decided on the basis of evidence, the bench observed. Its contents were not made public. The Liberhan Commission, which was instituted ten days after the demolition of the Babri Mosque insubmitted its report on 30 June — almost 17 years after it began its inquiry.

Ayodhya case: Know in four points what today’s ruling means

Justice Nazir says a constitution bench must decide what constitutes essential practices of a religion and thereafter Ayodhya land dispute should be heard. That is how it stood for about 90 years.


Here are a few questions. Although chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti lists as many as fifty-two places of pilgrimage, including towns, lakes, rivers, mountains, etc. The crucial verdict also paved the way for holding the hearing on title suit on October What is the arguement? During the reign of Baburthe first Mughal emperor, some have claimed that an old Hindu temple was demolished, and a mosque constructed at the same place in Ayodhya and named after Babur.

It was argued by the Muslim groups before a special bench of Verdcit Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer that the “sweeping” observation of the apex court in the verdict needed to be reconsidered by a five-judge bench as “it had and will have a bearing” on the Babri Masjid-Ram Temple land dispute case. Ram Janmabhoomi Vs Babri Masjid.

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for legal representative of Siddiq, had said the observation that mosques were not essential for practising Islam were made by the apex court without any enquiry or considering the religious texts. After the British took over the State, they put up a railing between the two areas to prevent disputes.

Archived from the original on 2 October The Uttar Pradesh government had earlier told the top court that some Muslim groups were verdicg to delay the hearing in the “long-pending” Ayodhya temple-mosque land dispute case by seeking reconsideration of the observation in the verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam.

The Supreme Court by 2: The Ramjanmabhumi Movement and Fear of the Self. M Siddiq, one of the original litigants of the Ayodhya case who has died and is being represented through his legal heir, had assailed certain findings of the verdict in the case of M Ismail Faruqui holding that a mosque was not integral to the.

Live updates: Supreme Court refuses to refer Ayodhya land dispute case to a larger bench

All the parties appealed against the verdict in the Supreme Court. Union of India case. Court made it clear these observations won’t affect the title suit,” he says. The Babri Masjid was destroyed during a political rally which turned verdoct a riot on 6 December Idols were placed inside the mosque.


The named reference NDTV was invoked but never defined see the help page. The Babri mosque was attacked by Hindus in the process.

While the three-judge bench was not unanimous that the disputed structure was constructed after demolition of a temple, it did agree that a temple or a temple structure predated the mosque at the same site.

Jilani is a senior advocate for the Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. They were stopped by the Uttar Pradesh police and the paramilitary forces, resulting in a pitched battle in which several kar sevaks were killed.

After the Guptas, the capital of North India moved to Kannauj and Ayodhya fell into relative neglect. War on Sacred Grounds. SC refuses to refer to a five-judge bench Ayodhya land dispute issue and contentious observation in Ismail Farooqui case – Mosque not essential for Namaz. He had also said that the issue of the observation was neither taken up by any litigant since ayofhya, nor in the present appeals which were filed in after the high court’s verdict.

One of his generals, Mir Baqi verrdict to Ayodhya in and after reportedly destroying [9] a pre-existing temple of Rama at the site, built a mosque, which has come to be called masjid-i-janmasthan mosque at the birthplace [10] as well as Babri Masjid Babur’s mosque.