New Delhi: On November 9th 2019 the supreme court of India gave a decision for the long-disputed land in Ayodhya (Uttar Pradesh). The issues spun around the control of a site customarily respected among Hindus to be the origin of their god Rama, the history and area of the Babri Masjid at the site, and whether a past Hindu temple was crushed to make a mosque.
The mosque there, the Babri Masjid, was crushed during a political meeting which transformed into a mob on 6 December 1992. A resulting land title case was heard in the Allahabad High Court, the decision of which was articulated on 30 September 2010. In the judgment, the three judges decided that the 2.77 acres of Ayodhya land be divided into three sections, with 33% to the Hindu Maha Sabha for the Ram temple popularly known as Ram Lalla, 33% to the Sunni Waqf Board, and the rest 33% going to Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu religious group. While this decision was not consistent that the contested structure was developed after the destruction of the temple, it agreed that a sanctuary structure originated before the mosque at the equivalent site.
Also Read – Unnao rape case victim set ablaze on her way to court
The five-judge bench at Supreme Court heard the title debate case from August to October 2019 and on 9th November 2019, the Chief Justice of India- Ranjan Gogoi, declared their decision; it abandoned the past verdict and decided that the land had a place with the administration as was evident through the tax records. It further arranged the land to be given over to a trust to construct the Hindu Ramjanmabhumi temple. It additionally requested the administration to give another five-acre of land to the Sunni Waqf Board to erect the mosque.
Also Read – Petiton Filed Against The Ayodhya Verdict
This verdict was challenged through 18 petitions, of which nine were filed by earlier litigation parties, and the other nine were categorized as third parties; which on Thursday 12th December 2019 were dismissed by the ace court. The five-judge bench headed by chief justice S A Bobde and justices- D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, S Abdul Nazeer and Sanjeev Khanna, reviewed these petitions and dismissed them on the grounds of zero merit. The court refused to entertain the other nine petitions stating that they were not a part of the original litigation, therefore, stood no firm ground to challenge the verdict.
Article Resource – Wikipedia
This article is contributed by Ecole Globale International School.
