Ayodhya Verdict

On 9/11/2019 Supreme Court delivered 1,045 pages verdict in Ayodhya Dispute. The verdict has two parts. First part is main verdict and ends on page 929 and has names of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices S A Bobde, Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer. Second part is an Addenda that has 116 pages and ends on page 1045. Fonts of two parts are different; it seems first part was printed on a laserjet or similar printer and second part was printed on a dot matrix printer. First part is unanimous. Second part is by one of the five whose name is not mentioned. He has recorded separate reasons on whether disputed structure is the birth place of Ram.
Persons familiar with Supreme Court verdicts say main part was written by Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Addenda by Justice Ashok Bhushan.
The verdict gave disputed 2.77 acres to Hindus and ordered 5 acres of land in a prominent place in Ayodhya be given to Muslims to build a mosque. It declared placing of idols on night of 22-23 December 1949 in Babri Mosque and demolition of Babri Mosque on 6 December 1992 as illegal.
In a separate verdict Supreme Court dismissed Special Leave Petition of Shia Central Board of Waqf U P versus Sunni Central Board of Waqf, SLP (Civil) Diary Number 22744 of 2017, due to inordinate delay of 24964 days against the final judgment dated 30 March 1946 of the Civil Judge, Faizabad.
The verdict had different reactions. Narendra Modi said the verdict should not be seen as win or loss for anybody. Congress said it respects the decision and was in favour of construction of Ram Temple. Akhilesh Yadav said the verdict is an important step in the right direction of strengthening secularism, rule of law and democracy. Mayawati said everyone should respect the verdict. Lal Krishna Advani said “I stand vindicated…”
Tushar Gandhi said “If the Gandhi murder case was retried by the Supreme Court today, the verdict would have been Nathuram Godse is a murderer but he is also a desh bhakt.” “Please all is not justice. Please all is politics.”
All India Muslim Personal Law Board expressed grave dissatisfaction and called the verdict neither equity nor justice. About 5 acres for mosque, AIMPLB lawyer Zafaryab Jilani said “You can not exchange land for a mosque.” Asaduddin Owaisi said Supreme Court is supreme but not infallible. He regretted victory of faith over facts. Kamal Farooqui said “It was never about land. They can take 100 acres from us if they want.” Syed Ahmed Bukhari, Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid of Delhi, accepted the verdict and said the matter should not be stretched further. Faizan Mustafa and Aymen Mohammed said the verdict is a setback to evidence law with differential burden of proof being demanded from different parties.
AIMPLB will decide on 17/11/2019 about filing review petition against the verdict. Maulana Mehmood Madani said “The Honourable five judges of the apex court despite admitting that the placing of idols and destruction of Babri Masjid were serious violations of the rule of law, it gave the land to those who had committed such crimes…”
If there is no review petition the matter will end. If there is a review petition the dispute will continue for some time. There is not much probability of reversal of verdict after review petition. We do not know how things will proceed from here. CJI Ranjan Gogoi retires soon, 17/11/2019 is his last day as CJI.

Updated: November 12, 2019 — 11:06 am


Add a Comment
  1. The verdict shows how majoritarianism has gripped our apex court too. Nevertheless, it’s good the issue is put to rest once and for all. Sentiments won’t be played with anymore in the name of this particular mandir at least. Maybe, BJP will now stake claim to the Taj [Tejo Mahalaya]?

  2. It’s very complicated issues .

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *