New Delhi, Nov 10 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Supreme Court, in its landmark ruling in the Ayodhya land dispute case, has also cited a poem written by famous English poet William Wordsworth related to faith.

The English Romantic poet was mentioned by one of the five judges on the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench, who offered a different perspective on the question of the birthplace of Lord Ram.

The judgement does not name the judge concerned, while his observation in question on the importance of Hindu faith has been included as an addendum.

The judge said that faith and belief foster and promote the spiritual life of the soul. According to him, the concept of Hinduism has been defined by great scholars and jurists.

He also pointed out that the core of all religions and faith is one, that is the quest for truth, the quest for knowing more about the soul and the quest to know more about the Supreme, who in one or other form is worshipped in all religions.

The order copy said: "Every religion, every faith reveres and sings the glory of God with whom we all want to relate. Wordsworth in his beautiful poem has also echoed the same thought."

Thereafter, he cited from Wordsworth's poem titled "Ode: Intimations of Immortality from Recollections of Early Childhood".

"Our birth is but a sleep and a forgetting;
The Soul that rises with us, our life's star
Hath had elsewhere its setting,
And cometh from afar;
Not in entire forgetfulness,
And not in utter nakedness,
But trailing clouds of glory do we come
From god who is our home."

The Supreme Court, in its judgement in the Ayodhya matter, has taken into account the travelogues of Joseph Tiefenthaler and William Finch regarding the history of the disputed site.

Source: IANS

The post SC’s Ayodhya ruling cites Wordsworth poem relating to faith appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 10 (SocialNews.XYZ) A day after the Supreme Court gave a historical verdict on the Ayodhya dispute, VHP convened a special meeting of its central office bearers at the VHP headquarters in New Delhi on Sunday to discuss the way forward.

VHP Working President Alok Kumar, who chaired the meeting, expressed gratitude to all the saints, eminent personalities, historians, jurists, experts of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) whose untiring support led to the verdict in their favour.

A resolution was passed in the meeting acknowledging the special role played by saints over the years and decades in the "struggle going on since 1528 CE". The VHP credited the saint fraternity "which initiated the current edition of the struggle" for the victory.

In a statement, it said: "In the Dharma Sansad held in 1984, they were the ones who resolved to liberate the Sri Ram Janmabhoomi and entrusted the Vishva Hindu Parishad to shoulder the responsibility of this second biggest movement of independent Bharat. Since then till now, their blessings, guidance and cooperation have always been available in every phase and chapter of the movement."

The VHP added that the entire Hindu society would remain thankful to them for "leaving their monasteries, temples, ashrams" to join the Ram Janmabhoomi movement. In the nineties, the movement reached its pinnacle when kar sevaks thronged Ayodhya. On December 6, 1992, the Babri Mosque which stood on the once disputed land, was brought down."

The VHP also legally analysed the granular details of Saturday's judgement. The VHP has urged the BJP-led Central and the Uttar Pradesh government to "take prompt action", suggesting they expedite the formalities.

Source: IANS

The post Day after Ayodhya verdict, VHP discusses way forward appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 10 (SocialNews.XYZ) In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

What's next? When will the construction of Ram Mandir begin? How long it will take to finish and most importantly, how will it look like?

The Ram Janambhoomi Nyas is eager to start construction at the earliest with help from the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP). Though the VHP has toyed with many maps of the Ram temple, there's a blueprint based on the most agreeable version that the majority believes resembles the 'original' Ram Mandir.

While for years, doors and pillars are being carved in Ayodhya, the sanctum sanctorum needs to be built with great details where Ram Lalla, the deity, will be placed and worshipped. Though the walls of it are believed to be ready, the 'garbhagriha' (sanctum sanctorum) isn't.

A total of 212 pillars will be required across the temple. It will be assembled in two stages with 106 pillars in each stage. Almost half of the pillars are ready, while the remaining needs to be carved.

The assembly of pillars will take place in two tiers with the top tier having a roof. According to the approved design, the roof will have a "shikhar" that will give the massive structure a look and feel of "Bhavya Ram Mandir" (grand Ram temple).

The proposed structure will be 128 feet high. It will be 140 feet in width and 270 feet in length. No steel will be used in the support base.

The Ram temple will have five entrances: Singh Dwar, Nritya Mandap, Rang Mandap, Pooja Room and the all important "Garbhagriha" with parikrama. Ram Lalla, the idol, will be placed on the ground floor.

At least 1.75 lakh cubic feet of sandstone will be required to construct the temple. A lot has been done, with work starting as early as in 1990. But a lot needs to be done as well.

More sandstones, more carving experts and expansion of the existing carving centre need to run against time to finish the temple. Even then, sources say, it won't be an easy task and will require a minimum of four years to complete the work.

"I cannot give you a timeframe on when the work will be finished. But we wish the construction begins as early as possible after completing the legal requirements," Alok Kumar, international working President of VHP told IANS.

One of the main reasons for time consumption is accessibility to the "karyashala". The roads are uneven and hence the supply of stones are also slow. Moreover, hand carving makes the process slower. However, the work for the ground floor is over.

However, there is a confusion over erecting a gigantic statue of Lord Ram, as many people want. It will need deliberation on the statue.

Source: IANS

The post 212 pillars, 128 ft high, 5 entrances: The elusive Ram Mandir appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Amiya Kumar Kushwaha

New Delhi, Nov 10 (SocialNews.XYZ) The seven-decade old Ayodhya land dispute was in limbo for nine years since it first reached the Supreme Court.

On May 8 2011, the top court stayed the Allahabad High Court order and started hearing the civil appeals filed by the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and RamLalla seeking claim on the disputed land. Unfortunately, the case kept being deferred date after date owing to multiple reasons.

When Justice Ranjan Gogoi took charge as the Chief Justice of India, he prioritised putting an end to one of the longest-running land dispute cases in the country. In fact, while recently hearing a matter related to the abrogation of Article 370 that granted special status to Jammu and Kashmir, the Chief Justice said that the court had no time to hear other matters on account of busy hearings' schedule in the Ayodhya land title case.

On January 8, 2019, Gogoi used a special administrative power under provisions of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 and constituted a five-judge Bench comprising Justices Gogoi, S. A. Bobde, N.V.Ramana, U.U. Lalit and D.Y. Chandrachud, to hear the appeals.

Interestingly, this unprecedented move was contrary to the order passed by a bench headed by former Chief Justice Deepak Misra, who had turned down the plea to refer the case to a five-judge Constitution bench on September 27 2018.

Since the beginning, Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi was seen interested in bringing the seven-old decade case to an end and, hence, on January 10, he directed the registry to inspect the records and engage official translators, if necessary.

he matter, however, faced a setback on January 10 when Justices Ramana and Lalit recused themselves prompting the top court to reschedule the hearing for January 25 before a new bench. On January 25, the apex court reconstituted a five-judge Constitution Bench comprising Chief Justice Gogoi and Justices Bobde, Chandrachud, Bhushan and Nazeer, who have taken the case to a legal conclusion.

During the course of the hearings, the case saw many twists and turns, including the formation of a panel of mediators headed by former Justice Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, and Senior Advocate Sriram Panchu.

When the mediators failed to settle the issue, the court began day-to-day-hearings on the case from August 6. During the course of these hearings, Justice Gogoi kept reminding the counsels to conclude their arguments as soon as possible. He also made it clear that the court would devote extra time to the case. On some days, the hearings went on till late evening.

In the middle of September, Gogoi asked the parties to wrap up the arguments by October 18. On October 16, he said "enough is enough," asking the parties to end arguments on that day itself. His efforts of conducting the hearing in fast pace finally brought good news for the country when on November 9, the Supreme Court finally delivered the judgement in the case bringing the curtains down on a highly emotive issue.

(Amiya Kumar Kushwaha can be contacted at amiya.k@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post Ayodhya issue was expedited after Gogoi became Chief Justice appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 10 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Supreme Court on Saturday in the judgement on the Ayodhya title dispute used special powers granted in the Article 142 of the Constitution.

This article was used twice by the five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi while delivering the verdict. Though the disputed 2.77 acres of land was awarded for a temple, based on the evidence, the top court invoked the powers of Article 142 to grant 5 acres for a mosque in Ayodhya.

The Article 142 says: "Enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court and unless as to discovery, etc (1) The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, and any decree so passed or orders so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order prescribe."

The five judge bench observed that there was no abandonment of the mosque by the Muslims. The top court observed that in the exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution must ensure a wrong committed should be remedied.

The bench also observed that the justice will not be served if the court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims,who have been deprived of the structure of the mosque through means, through means which do not favour secular nation governed by rule of law.

The court also invoked this Article to grant relief to Nirmohi Akhara and sought its inclusion on the trust formed by the Centre under Section 6 of the Ayodhya Act to construct Temple.

"In exercise of the powers vested in this Court under Article 142 of the Constitution, we direct that in the scheme to be framed by the Central Government, appropriate representation may be given in the Trust or body, to the Nirmohi Akhara in such manner as the Central Government deems fit," noted the court.

The Nirmohi Akhara suit has been dismissed by the top court, stating that it was barred by the statute of limitation.

This Article 142 was earlier invoked by the top court in October to annul the marriage of couple living separately for nearly 22 years.

Source: IANS

The post SC invokes Article 142 to grant relief to Muslim parties, Nirmohi Akhara appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Sumit Saxena

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) "The visit of Guru Nanak Devji in 1510-11 A.D. to have darshan of Lord Ram's birthplace does support the faith and belief of the Hindus," said the anonymous judge who believed that faith of the Hindus was important.

In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

This anonymous judge on the Ayodhya bench has offered a separate perspective on Lord Ram's birth. Though the judgement does not name the judge, his observations have been included as addendum.

The apex court observed that it was true that from the extracts of 'Janam Sakhis' -- the writings which profess to be biographies of Guru Nanak Dev which have been brought on record for the Ayodhya title dispute case -- there was no material to identify the exact place of Ram Janmabhoomi, but the visit of Guru Nanak Dev to Ayodhya was an event, which depicted that pilgrims were visiting Ayodhya for the darshan of Lord Ram's birthplace even before 1528 A.D.

During cross-examination, a witness identified as Rajinder Singh with an interest in reading religious, cultural and historical books of the Sikh cult referred to several books about Sikhism and history. He said that Guru Nanak Dev had sought darshan of Lord Ram's birthplace in Ayodhya.

The judge held that the faith and belief of Hindus about the location of Lord Ram's birthplace stemmed from religious scriptures and sacred books, including the Ramayana and Skanda Purana.

"Thus, it is found that in the period prior to 1528 A.D., there was sufficient religious texts, which led the Hindus to believe the present site of Ram Janmabhoomi as the birthplace of Lord Ram," said the anonymous judge.

The judge also cited Tulsidas in Bal Kaand, where he had composed verses, which were spoken through Lord Vishnu. The verses say that when Brahma appealed to Vishnu to relieve the 'devas', sages, 'Gandharvas' and earth from the terror of Ravana, Lord Vishnu said that "I will take human form and be born to Dasaratha and Kausalya in Kosalapuri.

"Chaupaiyas (verses) does not only refer to Vishnu taking the human form in Avadhpuri, i.e., Ayodhya, but the verse also specifically mentions that he will take human form at the house of Dasaratha and Kausalya," said the judge.

The SC judgement said, "One of us, while being in agreement with the above reasons and directions, has recorded separate reasons on whether the disputed structure is the birthplace of Lord Ram according to the faith and belief of the Hindu devotees. The reasons of the learned judge are set out in an addendum."

(Sumit Saxena can be contacted at sumit.s@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post Anonymous judge cites Guru Nanak, Tulsidas to back Hindu faith appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Sumit Saxena

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) "The Babri mosque was not constructed on vacant land," the Supreme Court said on Saturday while accepting the conclusions of Allahabad High Court Justice Sudhir Agarwal.

But the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report establishing the presence of a Hindu temple beneath the Babri Masjid cannot supercede the standards, which govern a civil trial, the top court said.

"Title to the land must be decided on settled legal principles and by applying evidentiary standards which govern a civil trial," said the court.

In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

The five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Rajan Gogoi said, "The underlying structure was not of Islamic origin, and the foundation of the disputed structure rests on the walls of the underlying structure."

The Muslim side had argued that the underlying structure could have been of Islamic origin. However, the apex court rubbished this claim, stating that the artefacts, including architectural fragments which have been recovered during excavation, have a distinct non-Islamic origin.

"Though individually, some of the artefacts could also have been utilised in a structure of Buddhist or Jain origin, there is no evidence of the underlying structure being of an Islamic religious nature," the top court said.

The ASI had concluded that the nature of the underlying structure and the recoveries which have been made would on stylistic ground suggest the existence of a temple structure dating back to 12th century A.D.

The court observed that the ASI on a balance of probabilities would have come to this conclusion which is supported by evidence. "The conclusion cannot be rejected as unsupported by evidence or lying beyond the test of a preponderance of probabilities, which must govern a civil trial," the court observed.

The apex court concluded that there was no specific finding that the underlying structure was a temple dedicated to Lord Ram.

"Significantly, the ASI has not specifically opined on whether a temple was demolished for the construction of the disputed structure though it has emerged from the report that the disputed structure was constructed on the site of and utilised the foundation and material of the underlying structure," observed the court.

The top court insisted that it was crucial for it to sift between "what the report finds and what it leaves unanswered."

The ASI report does find the existence of a pre-existing structure. The report deduces 17 rows of pillar bases (a total of 85 of which 50 were exposed in sections, in parts or whole).

"The report rejects the possibility (urged by the Sunni Central Waqf Board) of the underlying structure being of Islamic origin. But the ASI report has left unanswered a critical part of the remit which was made to it, namely, determination of whether a Hindu temple had been demolished to pave way for the construction of the mosque," observed the court while citing that the Ayodhya title dispute has to be decided through standards which govern a civil trial, and not on the archaeological findings which have been arrived at by the ASI.

(Sumit Saxena can be contacted at (sumit.s@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post SC upholds ASI report with caveat appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Veteran BJP leader L.K. Advani, the person credited with bringing the Ram temple movement to the political centre-stage, on Saturday said he stood vindicated after the Supreme Court verdict in the Ayodhya title suit and that it was time to "leave all contention and acrimony behind" and embrace communal concord and peace.

In a statement, the former Deputy Prime Minister said it was "gratifying" that the belief and sentiments of crores of countrymen have been respected.

"I join all my countrymen in wholeheartedly welcoming the historic judgement delivered by the five-judge bench of the Supreme Court today in the Ayodhya matter. I stand vindicated, and feel deeply blessed, that the Supreme Court has given its unanimous verdict paving the way for the construction of a magnificent temple for Lord Ram at Ramjanmabhhomi in Ayodhya," he said.

Advani, once considered a hardline Hindutva face who undertook yatras while pushing the temple issue over two decades back, said the apex court's judgement is the culmination of a long and contentious process that played itself out in various forums -- both judicial and non-judicial -- in the past many decades.

He was grateful to have got an opportunity to make his "contribution" to the Ram Janmabhoomi movement.

"I have always stressed that Ram and the Ramayana occupy an esteemed place in India's cultural and civilizational heritage and Ramjanmabhoomi holds a special and sacred place in the hearts of crores of our countrymen in India and abroad. Therefore, it is gratifying that their belief and sentiments have been respected," he said.

"Now that the prolonged Mandir-Masjid dispute in Ayodhya has come to an end, the time has come to leave all contention and acrimony behind and embrace communal concord and peace. Towards this end, I appeal to all sections of our diverse society to work together to strengthen India's national unity and integrity," Advani said.

He added, "In the course of the Ramjanmabhoomi movement, I had often stated that the true purpose of constructing a Ram Mandir at Ayodhya is to construct a magnificent Rashtra Mandir -- building India as a strong, prosperous, peaceful and harmonious nation with justice for all and exclusion of none. Let us rededicate ourselves to that noble mission today."

He also hailed the apex court's direction for allotting five acres of land for building a mosque in Ayodhya.

Source: IANS

The post I stand vindicated: Advani on Ayodhya verdict appeared first on Social News XYZ.

Sanjeev Kumar Singh Chauhan

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Legendary scriptwriter and film producer Salim Khan said on Saturday that a school should be built on the proposed 5-acre land in Ayodhya, to be given to the Muslims. Reacting to Supreme Court's verdict on Ayodhya dispute, Salim Khan (83) said Muslims in India desperately need schools, not a mosque.

Welcoming Supreme Court's historic verdict on Ayodhya dispute, Salim Khan, father of three Bollywood stars Salman, Sohail and Arbaaz, said that two virtues of Islam as described by Prophet are love and forgiveness. "So now after 'The-End' of this story (Ayodhya dispute), Muslims should adhere to these two virtues and march forward. Mohabbat zahir kariye aur maaf kariye (show love and forgive). Do not rewind, recap such issues now...just move ahead from here," said Salim Khan.

The renowned story writer, who in the early seventies formed the iconic Salim-Javed duo along with his friend Javed Akhtar, is of the view that in the past couple of decades, Indian society has matured. "The manner in which peace and harmony is being maintained, after the announcement of such a sensitive verdict, is commendable. Let's accept...a very old dispute has been settled. From core of my heart, I welcome the decision, " Salim Khan told IANS.

"Muslims should not discuss this (Ayodhya dispute). Instead, they should discuss their basic problems and try to find out solutions. The reason why I am saying that is we need schools and hospitals... why I am suggesting that is it would be better if we build a college at the alternative 5-acre land, to be provided in Ayodhya for building a mosque. Hume Masjid ki zaroorat nhi. Namaz to hum kahin bhi padh lenge...train me, plane me, zameen par, kahin bhi padh lenge (we can offer namaz anywhere, in train, plane or on the floor). But we need better schools. Talim achhi milegi 22 crore musalmano ko, toh is desh kee bahut si kamiyan khatam ho jayengi (if 22 crore Muslims get good education, then many problems of this counrty would be solved)" he added.

The octogenarian film writer who pioneered the Bollywood block buster formula, said Prime Minister Modi is laying stress on peace. "I agree with the PM, we really need peace today. We need peace to focus on our objectives. We have to think of our future. We should realise that better future exists for those who are educated in a better way. The real issue is that Muslims are not so well in taleem (education).So I would repeat that let us say 'The-End' (for Ayodhya issue) and make a new beginning," said Salim Khan, also respected for his talks and ideas on social issues affecting the people in India.

( can be contacted at sanjeev.c@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post Build a school for us on 5-acre land in Ayodhya: Salim Khan appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Supreme Court, in its judgement in the Ayodhya title suit, took note of travelogues of Joseph Tiefenthaler and William Finch regarding the history of the disputed site.

The top court, in its verdict, stated that the travelogues provide a detailed account both of the faith and belief of the Hindus based on the sanctity which they ascribed to the place of birth of Lord Ram and of the actual worship by the Hindus at the Janmasthan.

"Tieffenthaler and the account of Martin in the eighteenth century indicate the existence of the faith and belief of the Hindus that the disputed site was the birth-place of Lord Ram," the court noted.

These also also identify places that Hindus offered worship at, including 'Sita Rasoi', 'Swargdwar' and the 'Bedi' (cradle) - symbolising the birth of Lord Ram - in and around the disputed site.

The five-judge bench cited the "prevalence of the practice of worship by pilgrims at the disputed site including by parikrama (circumambulation) and the presence of large congregations of devotees on the occasion of religious festivals".

"There is historical presence of worshippers and the existence of worship at the disputed site even prior to the annexation of Oudh by the British and the construction of a brick-grill wall in 1857," it said.

Finch (1608-11) and Tieffenthaler who visited India between 1743-1785 provided an account of Ayodhya.

Conspicuous in both the accounts are references to worship of Lord Ram by the Hindus.

Tieffenthaler specifically refers to the 'Sita Rasoi', 'Swargdwar' and the 'Bedi', and his account describes religious festivals during the course of which Hindu devotees would throng these sites for worship.

His account in the eighteenth century is prior to the construction of the grill-brick wall in front of the mosque. Tieffenthaler refers to "a square box raised 5 inches above the ground with borders made of lime with the length of more than 5 ells (ells is a former English unit of length equal to 45 inches) and the maximum width of 4 ells", which the Hindus called the 'Bedi' or cradle.

This, as Tieffenthaler, notes, was the site of the house where Lord Vishnu was born in the form of the Lord Ram, and it was believed that either Aurangzeb or (according to others) Babur got the place razed.

Tieffenthaler, however, noted that in the place where the "native house of Lord Ram" existed, the Hindus circumambulate three times and lie prostrate on the floor. This account of Tieffenthaler refers to a focal point of worship namely the birth-place of Lord Ram around which worship took place and the "Hindus circumambulated and prostrated" (themselves)," it said.

Source: IANS

The post SC took note of travelogues to cement Hindus’ claim on Ayodhya land appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Amiya Kumar Kushwaha

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) The judiciary must preserve the sense of balance that the beliefs of one citizen do not interfere with freedoms and beliefs of another, the Supreme Court said while ruling in favour of the construction of the Ram temple on the disputed site in Ayodhya.

The top court, in its ruling, also said that the law must stand apart from political contestations over history, ideology and religion.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi stated this while concluding its judgement in the one of the longest-running land dispute cases in the country.

The Constitution bench made it clear that the court does not decide the title on the basis of faith or belief but on the basis of evidence.

"The law provides us with parameters as clear but as profound as ownership and possession. In deciding title to the disputed property, the court applies settled principles of evidence to adjudicate upon which party has established a claim to the immovable property," the bench said in its unanimous judgement.

The bench has taken into consideration every fact, evidence and oral argument during the case and said that these submissions have traversed the realms of history, archaeology, religion and the law.

"For a case replete with references to archaeological foundations, we must remember that it is the law which provides the edifice upon which our multicultural society rests. The law forms the ground upon which, multiple strands of history, ideology and religion can compete," the court said while concluding his judgement in the case.

"By determining their limits, this court as the final arbiter must preserve the sense of balance that the beliefs of one citizen do not interfere with or dominate the freedoms and beliefs of another," the top court said.

"On August 15, 1947, India as a nation realised the vision of self-determination. On January 26, 1950 we gave ourselves the Constitution of India, as an unwavering commitment to the values which define our society. At the heart of the Constitution is a commitment to equality upheld and enforced by the rule of law."

The top court citing the Constitution said that the citizens of all faiths, beliefs and creeds seeking divine provenance are both equal before the law and every judge of this court is not merely tasked with but sworn to uphold the Constitution and its values.

The court also made it clear that the Constitution does not make a distinction between the faith and belief of one religion and another.

"All forms of belief, worship and prayer are equal," the bench said.

"Those whose duty it is to interpret the Constitution, enforce it and engage with it can ignore this only to the peril of our society and nation. The Constitution speaks to the judges who interpret it, to those who govern who must enforce it, but above all, to the citizens who engage with it as an inseparable feature of their lives," the top court said.

(Amiya Kumar Kushwaha can be contacted at amiya.k@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post Beliefs of one do not dominate freedoms of another: SC appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) November 9, 2019 may be a day of closure for the Ram Janmabhoomi issue but this judicial pronouncement came after a long road. Through 'Kar Seva', rath yatras and even a violent turn like the demolition of Babri Masjid - the Ram Janmabhoomi movement has seen it all.

From the 1980s through the stormy 'shilanyas' days (foundation stone-laying), leading to the demolition of the Babri mosque on December 6, 1992, Ashok Singhal remained a prominent face of the movement. And why Singhal alone? Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Vishnu Hari Dalmia, Uma Bharti, Giriraj Kishore, Vinay Katiyar and Sadhvi Ritambhara - all were instrumental in ensuring the mosque is pulled down.

Saints and seers were mobilised and roped into the Ram temple's cause. And Singhal played a crucial role. While Singhal led the VHP, Advani of the BJP went all out to enthuse the nation. In 1990, Advani began his Rath Yatra from Gujarat's Somnath and meant it to conclude in Ayodhya. The air-conditioned van made to look like a chariot, was meant to enthuse people so that they converge upon Babri Masjid in Ayodhya. Draped in saffron, often flashing a sword and donning tilak, Advani was no longer the President of the BJP but the face of Hindutva politics, something India had not experienced since its Nehruvian socialist days.

Kar Sevaks converged in Ayodhya in October 1990 - though Advani was arrested in Bihar by Lalu Prasad's government, the mosque was stormed and bullets were fired resulting in deaths. Though the mosque survived this onslaught, it was eventually brought down on December 6, 1992.

But away from public spectacle of the world that Advani hogged and Singhal too enjoyed to a certain extent, the movement started much earlier in obscurity.

Though the legal tangle was going on from 1856, it was in 1949 when an idol of Ram Lalla was placed inside the central dome of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on the intervening night of December 22 and 23. This small step proved to be a decisive one that would shape the movement which would be led by the likes of Singhal. And the brains behind this was Chandreshwar Tiwari, who later came to be known as Paramhans Ramchandra Das. His accomplices which included Sudarshan Das, Abhiram Das and Ramsakal Das had executed the job stealthily.

Much later when Singhal became the firebrand leader of the movement and Advani went out with his rath, Das, in an interview to the New York Times in 1991, had said: "I am the very man who put the idol inside the masjid."

Movements are marked by red letter days. And the Ram Janmabhoomi movement is marked by three. Two of them are December 22 when the idol was placed and December 6, 1992 when the mosque was brought down. The third, of course brings a closure - November 9, 2019.

Source: IANS

The post Three dates that marked the Ram Janmabhoomi movement appeared first on Social News XYZ.

Kozhikode (Kerala), Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Former archaeologist K.K. Muhammed, who headed the North Division of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) has said that Saturday's judgement is "ultimate and nothing better could have come out."

The historic judgement of the Supreme Court directed the Centre to form within three months a trust which will build a temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya.

The court upheld the ASI report, which concluded that a temple existed at the disputed site.

Muhammed told IANS that he, as a postgraduate diploma student in 1976-77, was part of a 10-member excavation team headed by Prof B.B. Lal which undertook work at the disputed site. Another member of the team was the wife of former Union Minister Jairam Ramesh.

"This is the ultimate judgement and the most balanced one. I, as a Muslim, was hounded by certain quarters when I spoke the truth, and today, I stand vindicated. At some point of time, some things have to be told... some Muslim rulers in the past had knocked down Hindu temples," said Muhammed who retired from ASI in 2012, after 24 years of service.

"When this wrong act of the rulers is justified, then one becomes part of the original sin. Now I am extremely happy and deeply satisfied with what happened today," said Muhammed, who leads a retired life near Kozhikode.

In a unanimous judgement, a 5-member bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said the Sunni Waqf Board, which was a party to the title suit, should be given an alternate land somewhere else to build a mosque.

The disputed land of 2.77 acre has been given to the Hindus.

The Centre will make suitable provisions by handing over the land to the trust, the top court said.

Source: IANS

The post No better verdict could have come out: Ex-ASI top official appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Delivering a historic judgement in the Ayodhya title suit, the Supreme Court on Saturday observed that existence of a mosque at the disputed site "did not shake the faith and belief of Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the disputed site."

"...the physical structure of an Islamic mosque did not shake the faith and belief of Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the disputed site," said a five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi while pronouncing the judgment in the Ayodhya title suit.

The bench also comprising CJI designate S.A. Bobde, S.A. Nazeer, D.Y. Chandrachud and Ashok Bhushan also said: "The evidence indicates that despite the existence of a mosque at the site, Hindu worship at the place believed to be the birthplace of Lord Ram was not restricted."

"The existence of an Islamic structure at a place considered sacrosanct by the Hindus did not stop them from continuing their worship at the disputed site and within the precincts of the structure prior to the incidents of 1856-7," the bench said.

The court also noted that even after the construction of the dividing wall by the British, the Hindus continued to assert their right to pray below the central dome.

"This emerges from the evidentiary record indicating acts of individuals in trying to set up idols and perform puja both within and outside the precincts of the inner courtyard. Even after the setting up of the 'Ram Chabutra', pilgrims used to pay obeisance and make offerings to what they believed to be the 'Garbh Grih' located inside the three-domed structure while standing at the iron railing which divided the inner and outer courtyards," the bench said.

Source: IANS

The post Presence of mosque couldn’t shake Hindus’ beliefs: SC appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Hailing the Supreme Court verdict in Ayodhya title dispute case, Prime Minister Narendra Modi on Saturday said it marks a "new dawn" for the country where "fear, bitterness and negativity" should have no place.

In a televised address to the nation, he highlighted the date - November 9 - on which the historic judgement came, and noted it was on this day that the Berlin Wall had been brought down 30 years back and it is on this day that Kartarpur corridor was opened with Pakistan.

Noting that it had taken so long to resolve the Ayodhya dispute, the Prime Minister said it is time to think about the future now as the country has a lot of milestones to achieve.

"This controversy may have affected many generations, but after this decision, we have to make a resolution that now a new generation will start building a new India... This decision of the Supreme Court has brought a new dawn for us," he said.

"Now as a society, every Indian has to work by giving priority to his duty. Harmony, unity and peace are very important for the development of the country," Modi emphasised.

Speaking about the Kartarpur corridor which was inaugurated earlier in the day, the Prime Minister compared it to bringing down of the iconic Berlin Wall.

"November 9 was the date when the Berlin Wall fell in Germany. It marked the merging of two different ideologies. On November 9 today, the Kartarpur Sahib Corridor was also opened which marked an understanding between India and Pakistan. The verdict of the Supreme Court on 9 November gives the lesson to move united on the path of progress," said Modi.

Source: IANS

The post New dawn for country, says Modi on Ayodhya verdict appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Sumit Saxena

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Supreme Court on Saturday held that the "possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence from the Muslims," while emphasising on tolerance and mutual co-existence, which play a crucial role to nourish the secular commitment of the country and its people.

The apex court ordered the construction of a Ram temple at the disputed site by setting up a trust, while ordering five acres be given to Muslims in Ayodhya to construct a mosque.

The five-judge bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, observed the allotment of land to the Muslims is necessary "though on a balance of probabilities, the evidence in respect of the possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence adduced by the Muslims".

The Supreme Court, in its ruling on Ayodhya, took account the balance of probabilities, where it saw clear evidence the worship by the Hindus in the outer courtyard continued unimpeded in spite of the setting up of a grille-brick wall in 1857.

"The Muslims have offered no evidence to indicate that they were in exclusive possession of the inner structure (the birthplace of Lord Ram) prior to 1857 since the date of the construction in the sixteenth century," observed the court.

The Hindus' possession of the outer courtyard stands established together with the incidents attaching to their control over it, it said.

The court observed in connection with the inner courtyard, there is evidence on a preponderance of probabilities to establish worship by the Hindus prior to the annexation of Oudh by the British in 1857.

The bench admitted that it is "is tasked with an adjudicatory task of unique dimension" and that the current dispute is over immovable property, and it does not decide title on the basis of faith or belief but on the basis of evidence.

"The law provides us with parameters as clear but as profound as ownership and possession. In deciding title to the disputed property, the court applies settled principles of evidence to adjudicate upon which party has established a claim to the immovable property," it observed.

While awarding relief to the Muslim side, the court exercised its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, as it admitted its responsibility to ensure that a wrong committed must be remedied.

"Justice would not prevail if the court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims who have been deprived of the structure of the mosque through means which should not have been employed in a secular nation committed to the rule of law," said the court citing the Muslims were dispossessed upon the desecration of the mosque on December 22/23 1949 and it was ultimately destroyed on December 6, 1992.

The court observed it is necessary to provide restitution to the Muslim community for the unlawful destruction of their place of worship, and the court directed land measuring 5 acres be allotted to the Sunni Central Waqf Board either by the Central Government out of the acquired land or by the Government of Uttar Pradesh within the city of Ayodhya.

(Sumit Saxena can be contacted at sumit.s@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post Hindus’ evidence on better footing than Muslims, said SC appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid, Shahi Imam Ahmed Bukhari has welcomed the apex court judgement on the Ayodhya title suit, and said he does not agree with the All India Muslim Personal Law Board which said it may file a review petition on the verdict.

The Shahi Imam, speaking to the media, said "We have been consistently saying that we will accept the Supreme Court verdict. Regarding filing of a review petition, I do not agree on that. I think and hope the country will move forward towards development."

The Sunni Central Waqf Board too has said it will not file a review of the Supreme Court verdict or file a curative petition in the Ayodhya case.

Sunni Waqf Board chairman Zafar Faruqui said the board was "grateful" to the Supreme Court for setting aside as "erroneous" the observation of one of the judges of the Allahabad High Court in 2010 which diluted the provision of the Places of Worship Act 1991.

The Ayodhya verdict delivered on Saturday has given the disputed land to Ram Lalla, and said the Sunni Waqf Board be given five acres of alternate land for a mosque in Ayodhya.

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has said that after studying the judgement the board may file review petition. Board Executive member Kamal Farooqui said that this judgement is not based on facts but faith.

Source: IANS

The post Accept Ayodhya verdict: Bukhari appeared first on Social News XYZ.

Hyderabad, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) AIMIM President Asaduddin Owaisi on Saturday termed the judgment in the Ayodhya title dispute case as a victory of "faith over facts" and said that the Supreme Court is "supreme but not infallible".

Reacting to the Supreme Court verdict, Owaisi expressed apprehension that the Sangh Pariwar might use this judgment in cases of many other mosques on which they have claims. He said their list includes the mosques at Mathura, Kashi and Lucknow.

The Hyderabad MP also cautioned that the country was heading on the path of a 'Hindu rashtra'. "Sangh Pariwar and BJP have been saying that the road to Hindu rashtra road starts from Ayodhya. They now want to bring NRC, Citizenship Amendment Bill. In fact, Modi 2.0 is to make India a Hindu rashtra," he said.

In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

Owaisi told reporters that those who demolished the Babri Masjid were entrusted with the land to build Ram temple. "If Babri Masjid was not demolished on December 6, 1992, what would have been the judgment of the Supreme Court," he asked while pointing out that the apex court in its judgment described the demolition as an illegal act.

The All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) President endorsed the stand taken by All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) that it is not satisfied with the judgment. He said that the AIMPLB would hold a meeting and take a decision whether to go for an appeal against the verdict and whether to accept the offer of of 5 acres of alternate land to build the mosque or not. He said his personal view was that the offer should be rejected.

"We were fighting for legal righte. We don't need 5 acres land in charity. Muslims are poor, weak and they have been discriminated against but they can build a mosque on their own," he said.

He did not agree that AIMPLB failed to present its case before the apex court. He said the Board did its best by using the services of a team of best lawyers including Rajiv Dhawan.

The MP repeatedly remarked "supreme but not infallible" and pointed out that there were the words of former Chief Justice of India J.S. Verma, who wrote a book with the same title.

Owaisi contended that a mosque "was there, is there and will always be there" and that there can be no compromise on it. "Will tell our generation that mosque stood there for 500 years but on December 6, 1992 it was demolished under Sangh Pariwar and Congress conspiracy. The Supreme Court was betrayed.

"What happened on December 6, 1992 was not an issue of Muslims alone. The very foundations of secularism were shaken. Calling it vandalism is understatement," he said.

Referring to the Congress, he said the party showed its true colours through its reaction on the Supreme Court verdict. "But for hypocrisy and deceit of the Congress, this judgment would not have come," he said, recalling that it was during Congress rule that idols were placed in the mosque, its locks were opened and the mosque was demolished.

Source: IANS

The post Ayodhya verdict victory of faith over facts: Owaisi appeared first on Social News XYZ.

Lucknow, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Now that the Supreme Court has delivered its verdict in the much-awaited Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute case, the focus will shift to the second Ayodhya case pertaining to the Babri Masjid demolition that took place on December 6, 1992.

This case, related to the alleged criminal conspiracy behind the demolition of the mosque, is in the final stages of hearing in a Special CBI court in Lucknow.

Some high-profile names of Indian politics are the accused in the case, which has been going on for almost three decades now. Some of the accused persons in the case have already passed away.

The first FIR in this case, related to the demolition of the Babri Mosque, was registered immediate after it was brought down on December 6, 1992.

This first FIR no. 197/92 was registered against unknown 'karsevaks' under Sections 395, 397, 332, 337, 338, 295, 297, 153A of IPC, and Section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Minutes later, a second FIR no. 198/92 was registered under Sections 153A, 153B, 505 of the IPC against L.K. Advani, Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti, Vinay Katiyar, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya and Sadhvi Ritambhara. This was related to provocative speeches promoting enmity delivered ahead of the demolition.

Forty-seven other FIRs were registered in cases related to offences of assault on mediapersons, looting valuables like cameras and reporting gadgets etc. All FIRs were filed at the Ram Janmabhoomi police station in Ayodhya.

A few days later, the government recommended the demolition case no. 197 to the CBI, while the second case no. 198 was handed over to the CB-CID branch of the UP police. A year later, however, the second case was also transferred to the CBI.

The CBI, which took up investigation in all the 49 cases related to Babri Masjid demolition, filed a consolidated charge sheet against 40 people these cases in a special court in Lucknow on October 5, 1993.

Two years later, in January 1996, the agency filed a supplementary charge sheet against nine other prominent people, taking the total tally of accused persons to 49.

A charge of criminal conspiracy under Section 120(b) was added against the accused with the CBI claiming to have concrete and strong evidence to prove that the demolition of the mosque was the fallout of a larger and sinister conspiracy.

After the charge sheet was filed against the top leaders of the BJP and the RSS, the matter got entangled in legal complexities as some of the accused moved the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court against the lower court's decision to frame the charges. The matter kept lingering through legal manoeuvrings.

In 2001, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court passed a detailed order saying that there was no illegality in a joint single charge sheet for all the FIRs, since the offences were allegedly committed in same course of action for accomplishing a conspiracy.

The high court, however, said the state government's faulty notification for fixing the trial court dated October 8, 1993 was curable and could be done so through another notification.

The CBI wrote to the UP government, asking it to rectify the error as pointed out by the high court and issue a fresh notification empowering the special court for resuming trial but the then Rajnath Singh government in Uttar Pradesh decided not to issue any fresh notification.

The CBI then moved a petition in the designated court of Rae Bareli, requesting the court to start to proceed with the trial of the case 198/92 related to hate speeches against Advani and others.

Special magistrate Rae Bareli discharged Advani in case no. 198/92, but ordered framing of charges against the remaining accused. Advani was then the deputy prime minister of India.

In 2005, the high court heard several review petitions filed against the Rae Bareli court's order of acquitting Advani and ordered re-framing of charges against him and all the other accused.

Subsequently, the Rae Bareli court framed charges against all the accused.

The CBI finally reached the Supreme Court in 2011 and pleaded for a common trial of all the 49 cases.

The Supreme Court in 2017, ruled against the Allahabad High Court order of dropping conspiracy charges. The apex court ordered for invoking of conspiracy charges against the accused, including Advani and 20 others, and bringing back the trial of all cases was also brought back to the Lucknow court.

Meanwhile, one of the accused, Kalyan Singh, became Governor of Rajasthan, and gained legal immunity. However, in September when he completed his gubernatorial assignment, trial against him has also begun.

A number of accused, including Bal Thackeray, Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore and others, have passed away during the 27 years of the case.

The court has examined around 300 witnesses so far and around 50 of them have passed away. Besides, volumes of written statements, press reports and government orders have been part of the evidences.

Senior advocate I.B. Singh, who had argued in defence of several of the accused, said, "The trial is in its last phase now, and a few more witnesses are to be examined, mostly against Kalyan Singh. We expect completion of trial in the case in the days to come."

Singh said, "The case has been marked by drawbacks from the first day, including why different FIRs were registered for a crime related to the same incident. Over the years, it has been more an effort of political witch hunt rather than serious investigation of the crime."

Source: IANS

The post Focus will now shift to Babri Mosque demolition case appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Arshad Afzaal Khan

Ayodhya, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) As the Supreme Court anounced its verdict in the contentious Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute on Saturday, a celebratory mood prevailed in parts of Ayodhya town, as local residents burst crackers and chanted 'Jai Shri Ram' slogans.

Before the verdict, the Faizabad-Ayodhya administration and the state government had warned citizens against any "victory celebration."

The celebrations were witnessed mainly in Shringaar Haat, Asharfi Bhawan, Nirmochan Ghat and at Ram Ki Pairi areas.

Ram Bhawan Das, a sadhu, said it is a "victory" of the Hindu community. "We were waiting for this day... Now a grand Ram Mandir will be constructed. Ayodhya should be decorated with lights and flowers," Das said.

Dr Anil Singh , Professor in local Saket Degree College, said, "It is time for restraint and not act as if we were teasing a community. The administration must check these celebrations".

A local social activist, Surya Kant Pandey, said the government should now focus on area's development, employment, farmers and minorities.

However, members of the Muslim community were guarded in their reaction. Sajjad Ali, a local shopkeeper, said, "We don't want to comment on the judgement, but we feel upset that in spite of assurances and the presence of such a heavy force, celebrations are being carried out in Ayodhya."

Haji Asad, corporator of Ayodhya Municipal Corporation, said, "We have already said that the verdict will be accepted, but those who are 'celebrating victory' must know they are teasing us."

Source: IANS

The post Celebrations in parts of Ayodhya despite govt warning appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Some Muslim bodies are contemplating filing a review petition against Saturday's Supreme Court verdict in the Ayodhya dispute that gives the disputed land to the Hindus for a temple and five acres of alternate land to the Muslims for a mosque.

With more dissenting voices coming forward against the verdict, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) Executive Member Kamal Farooqui told IANS it was contemplating filing a review petition after studying the judgement.

"This judgement is based on faith, not facts. The apex court used Article 142, which gives it special powers. We did not demand land for land. But you gave us five acres of land in exchange for 67 acres," Farooqui told IANS.

Sunni Waqf Board lawyer Zafaryab Jilani said: "We respect the judgement but we are not satisfied. The judgement is not as per our expectations."

"After today's order, it looks we will file a review petition. But a final decision will be taken only after consultation with our legal team," he added

"Today's observation by the Chief Justice of India will go a long way in the nation's welfare," Jilani added.

The five-judge Supreme Court bench ordered that the disputed Ayodhya land must be given to Hindus for a temple, to be built at the site by a trust formed under the control of the Central government. The government has to formulate a scheme on it within three months.

Source: IANS

The post AIMPLB, Waqf Board mull review plea against Ayodhya verdict appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) In the much-awaited verdict in the Ayodhya land dispute case, the Supreme Court on Saturday said that Hindu and Muslim faiths co-existed before the 1856-57 riots which broke out between the communities in the vicinity of the structure.

In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

The apex court stated that it was tasked with the resolution of "a dispute whose origins are as old as the idea of India itself".

"The events associated with the dispute have spanned the Mughal empire, colonial rule and the present constitutional regime," the five-judge SC bench led by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi said.

The top court observed that within the premises of the same complex, there existed two religious faiths.

"Their coexistence was at times, especially before 1856, accepting and at others, antagonistic and a cause of bloodshed. Yet, the distinctive features of the site, embodying both Hindu and Islamic traditions, led to the creation of a space with an identity of its own," the five-judge bench said.

It stated that the real significance attached to the composite structure is evidenced by the nature and the length of use by both of the parties.

"The disputed site has witnessed a medley of faiths and the co-existence of Hindu and Muslim practices, beliefs and customs," the court said, explaining the religious and architectural tradition of the demolished mosque.

A blend of Hindu and Muslim elements emerges from the religious and architectural tradition associated with the erstwhile structure which embodied the features of both a temple and a mosque.

While the distinctive architectural elements overlapped, they were easily recognisable.

"They were symbols of a syncretic culture. Specific sculptured finds such as the black Kasauti stone pillars along with the presence of the figurines of Varah, Garud, Jai and Vijay suggest that they were primarily meant for decoration of a Hindu temple facade and served as deities to be worshipped," the top court said.

At the same time, the distinctive appearance of a mosque emerged from the three domes, the Vazoo, the stone inscription with Allaha, the mimbar and the mehrab. These features indicate that the disputed premise was constructed as a mosque, the court observed.

Source: IANS

The post Before 1856 riots, Hindu-Muslim faiths co-existed: SC appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Supreme Court on Saturday held that the demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, was "an egregious violation of the rule of law" and as a remedy, it directed the government to allot a separate 5 acres land for construction of the mosque.

A five-judge constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said "the destruction of the mosque took place in breach of the order of status quo and an assurance given to this Court".

On August 14, 1989, the Allahabad High Court ordered maintenance of status quo in the disputed structure which was upheld by the top court on November 15, 1991.

But a violent mob on December 6, 1992 demolished Babri mosque, asserting that there existed an ancient temple dedicated to Lord Ram, which was demolished by a military commander of Mughal Emperor Babur.

Holding that a wrong committed must be remedied and exercising its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the court directed that the Central Government or Uttar Pradesh government should allot land measuring 5 acres to the Sunni Central Waqf Board for construction of the mosque within Ayodhya.

Emphasising that Constitution postulates the equality of all faiths, it also said that "tolerance and mutual co-existence nourish the secular commitment of our nation and its people".

"Justice would not prevail if the court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims who have been deprived of the structure of the mosque through means which should not have been employed in a secular nation committed to the rule of law," the court said.

But the court said that the existence of the structure of the mosque until December 6, 1992 does not admit any contestation.

"The allotment of land to the Muslims is necessary because though on a balance of probabilities, the evidence in respect of the possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence adduced by the Muslims, the Muslims were dispossessed upon the desecration of the mosque on December 22-23 1949 which was ultimately destroyed on December 6 1992," it said.

The court also noted that Namaz (prayers) was offered on Fridays till December 1949 and last namaz was held on December 16, 1949. On the intervening night of December 22 -23 1949, two idols were placed inside the central dome of the Babri Masjid and the devotees claimed that the idols appeared miraculously on their own. In 1934, the walls and one of the domes of the Masjid were damaged during riots.

"The damage to the mosque in 1934, its desecration in 1949 leading to the ouster of the Muslims and the eventual destruction on December 6, 1992 constituted a serious violation of the rule of law," the court said.

The court, while ruling in favour of the construction of the temple, said that "the Hindus have established a clear case of a possessory title to the outside courtyard by virtue of long, continued and unimpeded worship at the Ramchabutra and other objects of religious significance".

Source: IANS

The post Babri Masjid demolition was violation of law, says SC appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) In a historic judgement in the hugely-sensitive Ayodhya land dispute case, the Supreme Court on Saturday directed the Centre to form a trust within three months to build a Ram temple at the disputed site.

The Sunni Waqf Board, which was a party to the seven-decade-old title suit, should be given an alternate five-acre land within three months at some other place in Ayodhya for the construction of a mosque, the five-member SC bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said in a unanimous 1045-page judgement.

"On the balance of probabilities, there is clear evidence to indicate that the worship by the Hindus in the outer courtyard continued unimpeded in spite of the setting up of a grill-brick wall in 1857. Their possession of the outer courtyard stands established together with the incidents attaching to their control over it," the verdict said.

The top court, while observing that it was tasked with "an adjudicatory task of unique dimension", said, "The Central Government shall, within a period of three months from the date of this judgment, formulate a scheme which shall envisage the setting up of a trust with a Board of Trustees or any other appropriate body."

It added, "The scheme to be framed by the Central Government shall make necessary provisions with regard to the functioning of the trust or body, including on matters relating to the management of the trust, the powers of the trustees, including the construction of a temple and all necessary, incidental and supplemental matters; Possession of the inner and outer courtyards shall be handed over to the Board of Trustees of the Trust or to the body so constituted."

The bench, which also comprised Chief Justice-designate Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, Justice Ashok Bhushan, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, said the Central government will be at liberty to make suitable provisions with respect to the rest of the acquired land by handing it over to the trust or body for management and development in terms of the scheme framed in accordance with the above directions.

"Possession of the disputed property shall continue to vest in the statutory receiver under the Central Government, until in exercise of its jurisdiction under Section 6 of the Ayodhya Act of 1993, a notification is issued vesting the property in the trust or other body," the judgement said.

"Simultaneously, with the handing over of the disputed property to the Trust or body, a suitable plot of land admeasuring 5 acres shall be handed over to the Sunni Central Waqf Board," the judgment said, adding: "The land shall be allotted either by the Central Government out of the land acquired under the Ayodhya Act 1993 or the State Government (UP) at a suitable prominent place in Ayodhya."

The Central government and the state government "shall act in consultation with each other to effectuate the above allotment in the period stipulated," the verdict said.

"The Sunni Central 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 so allotted together with other associated facilities," it said.

The court also directed that "in the scheme to be framed by the Central Government, appropriate representation may be given in the Trust or body to the Nirmohi Akhara in such manner as the Central Government deems fit", even though it rejected the claim of the Nirmohi Akhara of being a 'shebait' (a devotee who serves the deity).

The bench, while delivering the landmark judgement, noted that the dispute was over immovable property and "the court does not decide title on the basis of faith or belief but on the basis of evidence."

It emphasised that "every judge of this court is not merely tasked with but sworn to uphold the Constitution and its values. The Constitution does not make a distinction between the faith and belief of one religion and another. All forms of belief, worship and prayer are equal."

The apex court also said that the three-way bifurcation of the land ordered by the Allahabad High Court in 2010 was "legally unsustainable".

"Even as a matter of maintaining public peace and tranquillity, the solution which commended itself to the High Court is not feasible. The disputed site admeasures all of 1,500 square yards. Dividing the land will not subserve the interest of either of the parties or secure a lasting sense of peace and tranquility," it observed.

In its judgement, which took cognizance of historical records and reports of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and various other materials, the court said, "The evidence indicates that despite the existence of a mosque at the site, Hindu worship at the place believed to be the birth-place of Lord Ram was not restricted.

"The existence of an Islamic structure at a place considered sacrosanct by the Hindus did not stop them from continuing their worship at the disputed site and within the precincts of the structure prior to the incidents of 1856-57. The physical structure of an Islamic mosque did not shake the faith and belief of Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the disputed site.

"On the other hand, the learned counsel fairly stated that the evidence relied on by the Sunni Central Waqf Board to establish the offering of namaz by the Muslim residents commences from around 1856-57."

The judgement also referred to the setting up of a railing in 1857 by the British around the disputed structure of the mosque in the backdrop of a contestation and disputes over the claim of the Hindus to worship inside the precincts of the mosque.

"This furnished the context for the riots which took place between Hindus and Muslims in 1856-57. The construction of a grick-brick wall by the colonial administration was intended to ensure peace between the two communities with respect to a contested place of worship.

"The grill-brick wall did not constitute either a subdivision of the disputed site which was one composite property, nor did it amount to a determination of title by the colonial administration," the judgment said.

Source: IANS

The post Centre to form trust in 3 months for building temple appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Arshad KHAN

Ayodhya, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) All entry points to Ayodhya have been sealed and the authorities are not allowing even two-wheelers and "outsiders" to enter the temple town.

Almost all shops and businesses establishments in Ayodhya and neighbouring city Faizabad remained closed on Saturday as a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court pronounced its verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.

The Senior Superintendent of Police and District Magistrate conducted an aerial survey of the town on Saturday. "Everything will become normal soon," said Faizabad District Magistrate Anuj Kumar Jha.

Meanwhile about two dozen people gathered at Ram Janmabhooi temple for 'darshan'.

The main litigant from Hindu side, Triloki Nath Pandey, said: "The exile of Lord Ram has ended. We have no objection to build the mosque, but we will not allow any mosque to be built in the name of Babur."

Source: IANS

The post ‘Outsiders’ not allowed in fortress Ayodhya appeared first on Social News XYZ.

Hyderabad, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) AIMIM President Asaduddin Owaisi on Saturday said that the Supreme Court is "supreme but not infallible" and termed its judgment in the Ayodhya title dispute case as a victory of "faith over facts".

Reacting to the Supreme Court verdict in the Ayodhya case, Owaisi expressed apprehension that the Sangh Pariwar will now target other mosques, including those at Mathura and Kashi.

The Hyderabad MP also cautioned that the country was heading on the path of a 'Hindu rashtra'.

In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

Owaisi told reporters that those who demolished the Babri Masjid were entrusted with the land to build Ram temple. "If Babri Masjid was not demolished on December 6, 1992, what would have been the judgment of the Supreme Court," he asked.

The All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) President said that the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) will decide on the offer of 5 acres of alternate land to build the mosque. He said his personal view was that the offer should be rejected.

Referring to the Congress, he said the party showed its true colours through its reaction on the Supreme Court verdict. "But for hypocrisy and deceit of the Congress, this judgment would not have come," he said, recalling that it was during Congress rule that idols were placed in the mosque, its locks were opened and the mosque was demolished.

Source: IANS

The post Victory of faith over facts: Owaisi appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) RSS supremo Mohan Bhagwat on Saturday said that everyone should work together for construction of the Ram Temple in Ayodhya now that the Supreme Court has delivered its verdict in favour of the Hindus.

He was addressing the media here after the the historic verdict by a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court that directed the Central government to form, within three months, a trust which will build a temple at the disputed site.

Bhagwat further said that it is for the government to decide the location where the Sunni Waqf Board will be provided five acres of land for construction of the mosque, as per the order of the Supreme Court.

"Don't look at this verdict through the prism of victory or defeat. The solution arrived at through the churning of truth and justice should be looked at as a decision that will bring about unity and friendship of the entire Indian society," he said.

Bhagwat also said that he hopes the government will soon initiate action to implement the decision of the Supreme Court.

"We believe the verdict passed by the Supreme Court in the direction of ending the dispute will be implemented by the government on an urgent basis," he said.

Source: IANS

The post Everyone should work together to build Ram Temple: RSS chief appeared first on Social News XYZ.

Kolkata, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) West Bengal Governor Jagdeep Dhankhar on Saturday said the Supreme Court judgement in the Ayodhya dispute should not be looked as "victory or defeat" for anyone and appealed to all concerned to "wholeheartedly" accept it.

"I am happy that the honourable Supreme Court has decided an issue that was engaging attention of the whole country. The judgement should not be looked as victory or defeat for anyone. It should be wholeheartedly accepted and worked upon," Dhankhar told the media on the sidelines of a programme here.

Emphasising that all Indians stand for unity and strength of the nation, the Governor said the Ayodhya verdict was not for one party or another.

"I would appeal to all sections of the society that after an indulgent hearing for several decades, the issue has come to be determined by the highest court of the largest democracy of the earth. And that judgement should be accepted by all," he added.

The Supreme Court on Saturday gave the 2.77 acre disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus and asked the government to give alternate land to the Sunni Waqf Board, which was a party to the title suit.

In the unanimous judgement, the five-member bench directed the Centre to form within three months a trust, which will build a Ram temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya.

Source: IANS

The post Ayodhya judgement should be accepted by all: Bengal Governor appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Terming the historic Babri Masjid at the disputed site in Ayodhya as "invaluable", Sunni Waqf Board lawyer Zafaryab Jilani on Saturday said that construction of another mosque on another location, as ruled by the Supreme Court in its verdict, was "unacceptable".

"A mosque is invaluable. What is five acres? Even 500 acres is unacceptable," Jilani said when asked about the Supreme Court verdict that gave the disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus for construction of a temple and five acres of alternate land to the Muslims for a mosque.

"The Sharia does not allow us to give the mosque to anyone, not even as a gift," added Jilani. He said the final decision on accepting the land will be taken by the Sunni Waqf Board.

Jilani maintained that the Board respects the Supreme court, but disagreeing with the judgement is every citizen's right. "We respect the judgement but we are not satisfied. The judgement is not as per our expectations," he said.

"After today's order, it looks like we will file a review petition. But a final decision will be taken only after consultation with our legal team," he added.

"Today's observation by the Chief Justice of India will go a long way in the nation's welfare," Jilani further said.

Rajiv Dhawan, the other lawyer who represented the Muslims or the Sunni Waqf Board, evaded a reply.

Source: IANS

The post Mosque invaluable, even 500 acres unacceptable: Jilani appeared first on Social News XYZ.

By Sumit Saxena

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) One of the five judges on the Supreme Court's Ayodhya bench has offered a different perspective on the question of birth of Lord Ram. However, the judgement does not name the judge, but his observation has included as addendum. The judge felt Hindu's faith is important.

"...the conclusion that faith and belief of Hindus since prior to construction of mosque and subsequent thereto has always been that Janmasthan of Lord Ram is the place where Babri Mosque has been constructed which faith and belief is proved by documentary and oral evidence discussed...," the judge concluded.

This judge observed that evidence on record clearly establishes that the Hindus' faith and belief that the mosque was constructed at the birth place of Lord Ram, and the three-dome structure was the birth place of the deity.

The fact that Hindus were, by constructing iron wall dividing the mosque premises, kept outside the three-dome structure cannot be said to alter their faith and belief regarding the birth place of Lord Ram. "The worship on the Ram Chabutra in the outer courtyard was symbolic worship of Lord Ram who was believed to be born in the premises," said the judge.

The judge observed that it was only during the British period that a grille was constructed dividing the walled premises of the mosque into an inner courtyard and outer courtyard.

"Grilled iron wall was constructed to keep Hindus outside the grilled iron wall in the outer courtyard. In view of the construction of the iron wall, the worship and puja started in Ram Chabutra in the outer courtyard. Suit of 1885 was filed seeking permission to construct temple on the said Chabutra where worship was permitted by the British Authority," said the judge.

(Sumit Saxena can be contacted at sumit.s@ians.in)

Source: IANS

The post Mystery judge on Ayodhya bench felt Hindu faith important appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) In what will go down in history as one of its most landmark verdicts, the Supreme Court on Saturday granted the ownership of the 2.77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus, paving the way for the construction of a Ram Temple, and ruled that the Muslims will get 5 acres of land at an alternative site.

A five-judge bench led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi unanimously decided that the disputed land must be given to Hindus and ordered the Central government to form a trust for the construction of a temple, bringing to a close the longest-drawn controversy in the country's history that has become one of the most defining aspects of its polity.

Here are the 10 salient points from the SC verdict:

• The apex court ruled that Hindus will get the disputed land subject to conditions. The 2.77-acre complex will be handed over to the trust, which has to be formed within three months. The management of of the temple construction will be monitored by the trust. The Centre must appoint a board of trustees within three months.

• Muslims will get alternative land of 5 acres for the construction of a mosque. The apex court ruled that Muslims couldn't prove exclusive possession of the inner courtyard, which was in contention, while the outer courtyard was in exclusive possession of the Hindus.

• 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 landmark verdict was read out by a five-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and also comprising CJI-designate S.A. Bobde, D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S. Abdul Nazeer.

• CJI Ranjan Gogoi, who retires on November 17, decided the date of the verdict in consultation with the four other judges after 40 days of daily hearing, making it the second longest hearing in the top court.

• Under Article 142, the SC directed, in the scheme to be framed, Nirmohi Akhara, an order of ascetics, will also get representation. The Akhara's suit, one of the main parties in the case, was dismissed as the bench held that it was barred by limitation. The SC also rejected that Nirmohi Akhara is a shebait (manager) of the complex. "Land to remain vested in statutory receiver till trust is formed," ruled the court.

• The five-judge bench unanimously rejected the Shia Waqf Board petition, claiming that the rights on the Babri Masjid on the disputed land in Ayodhya were over that of the Sunni Waqf Board.

• 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 apex court also said that the underlying structure was not of Islamic religion. Artefacts, architectural evidence had distinct non-Islamic nature, said CJI Gogoi. At the same time, the top court also said, "But ASI report hasn't said the underlying structure was a specific temple."

• The apex court said that Hindus consider Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram. "Faith of Hindus is undisputed that Lord Ram was born in Ayodhya," ruled the court. Faith, the judgement read, is a matter of individual belief.

Source: IANS

The post Ayodhya verdict explainer: 10 takeaways appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) Union Home Minister Amit Shah on Saturday welcomed the Ayodhya verdict and said the decision will strengthen the country's unity, integrity and great culture, as he urged all communities to maintain peace and harmony.

In a series of tweets in Hindi, Shah expressed gratitude to all the people and organisations who contributed and tried for so many years on the dispute.

"I welcome the Supreme Court's unanimous decision on the Ram birthplace. I appeal to people of all communities and religions to accept this decision with ease and remain committed to our resolve of 'Ek Bharat-Shreshtha Bharat', full of peace and harmony," Shah said.

He said he is confident that "this landmark judgment" will prove to be a milestone. "This decision will further strengthen India's unity, integrity and great culture."

"The legal dispute of Ram birthplace, which was going on for decades, has come to a finality with this decision today (Saturday). I congratulate the justice system of India and all the judges," Shah added.

The Supreme Court on Saturday gave the 2.77 acre disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus and asked the government to give alternate land to the Sunni Waqf Board, which was a party to the title suit.

In the unanimous judgement, the five-member bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi directed the Centre to form within three months a trust which will build a temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya.

Source: IANS

The post Ayodhya verdict will strengthen India’s unity, integrity: Shah appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) The Congress Working Committee (CWC) on Saturday said it respects the verdict of the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya title dispute case and appeal to all to maintain peace and harmony.

In a statement, the CWC said it is the responsibility of each one of us to reaffirm the tradition of mutual respect and unity among all that has defined our society through the ages.

"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," it said.

The Supreme Court on Saturday gave the 2.77 acre disputed land in Ayodhya to the Hindus and asked the government to give an alternate land to the Sunni Waqf Board, which was a party to the title suit, to build a mosque.

In the unanimous judgement, the five-member bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, directed the Centre to form within three months a trust which will build a temple at the disputed site in Ayodhya.

Source: IANS

The post Congress respects Ayodhya verdict, appeals for peace appeared first on Social News XYZ.

The Supreme Court on Saturday cleared the way for the construction of a Ram Temple at the disputed site at Ayodhya and directed the Centre to allot a 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque.

Read the full transcript of the judgment here:

The post Full Transcript Of Indian Supreme Court Final Verdict On Ayodhya appeared first on Social News XYZ.

New Delhi, Nov 9 (SocialNews.XYZ) "A historical wrong has been corrected", said a senior lawyer of the Hindu side after the Supreme Court on Saturday ruled in favour of a temple in the Ayodhya title dispute case.

Speaking to IANS, senior advocate P S Narasimha, who represented Ram Lalla Virajman, said: "Hindus were praying at the Ram Janambhoomi before the mosque was constructed. And after the mosque was constructed, they continue to pray till date. This is a great judgement...A historical wrong has been corrected."

A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi ruled in favour of the Hindu side.

"The Centre shall, within three months, formulate a scheme under the Ayodhya Act 1993. This scheme will have a Trust for management and construction of temple. Inner courtyard, which Hindus believe the birthplace of Lord Ram, and the outer courtyard be handed over to the Trust. Centre to give rest of the land to Trust," said the bench giving the 2.77 acre disputed land to the Hindu side.

Celebrating their victory the lawyers of the Hindu side posed for a group picture outside the Chief Justice courtroom in the Supreme Court premises.

Source: IANS

The post Historical wrong has been corrected: Ram Lalla counsel appeared first on Social News XYZ.