Pages

Search This World

LIVE TV Watch the news unfold

MYTV CNBC TV18 CNBC AAWAZ CNN IBN IBN7 IBN LOKMAT
Showing posts with label Ayodhya verdict. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ayodhya verdict. Show all posts

Thursday, September 30, 2010

Ayodhya verdict: Allahabad High Court judgement soon

New Delhi / Lucknow:  Sixty years after it first went to court, there shall be a verdict in the Ayodhya title suit soon. The Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court comprising Justice S U Khan, Justice Sudhir Agarwal and Justice D V Sharma, have started proceedings to pronounce the judgement.

The litigants have reached Court No. 21 of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. Barricades have been erected about 100 metres from the courtroom and no one other than those connected with the case are being allowed anywhere near the it.

The verdict in the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute will decide whether the 2.7 acres of disputed land on which the Babri Masjid stood before it was demolished on December 6, 1992, belongs to the Sunni Central Waqf Board or to the Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha.

It has been a protracted legal battle, and people across the country have spoken in one voice on the need to maintain peace and harmony irrespective of the verdict.

The Ayodhya dispute at a glance;

  • The verdict to be delivered in Lucknow today considers a dispute over 2.7 acres of land in Ayodhya.

  • The dispute was first taken to court 60 years ago

  • There are four title suits that ask the court to decide on:

  -  ownership of the land

  - whether there was a temple at the site before 1538

  - did the idols of Lord Ram, Sita and Lakshman exist inside the mosque, or were the idols placed inside on 22 December, 1949?

There was communal tension when an idol of Lord Ram was found inside in December 1949, and the government confiscated the site. That is when the lawsuits began.

  • The Ramjanmabhoomi Trust holds that this land is the birthplace of Lord Ram

  • The Waqf Board holds that the land was site of the 16th century Babri mosque

  • In December 1992, thousands of kar sevaks, led by BJP and RSS leaders, demolished the Babri Masjid.


The litigants involved with the four suits being considered today are the following. All these cases were originally filed in the court of the Civil Judge, Faizabad, and are now before the High Court. (Ayodhya verdict: Legal issues at stake)

  • Gopal Singh Visharad - case filed on January 16, 1950. Gopal Singh Visharad has since died and his son Rajendra Singh is now the litigant. 
  

Relief claimed:
- That Hindu's be entitled to go to visit the dispute site and worship the idols there without any checks or obstructions.

- Prohibitory orders must be issued preventing anyone from removing the idols and closing the doors of the masjid.
  • Nirmohi Akhada - case filed on December 17, 1959. The case was filed by the Akhada through Mahant Ragunath Das, who is now dead.

Relief claimed:

- To give the management of the disputed site to the descendents of Mahant Ragunath Das, the Mahant of the Nirmohi Akhada.

  • Sunni Central Board of Waqfs, UP - case filed on December 18, 1961 by the Central Board of Waqfs, UP, through secretary and nine others.

Relief claimed:
- That the disputed site must be declared as a mosque and the area adjoining as a Muslim graveyard.

- That possession be given to the central board of waqfs.

  • On behalf of deity Lord Ram and Deoki Nandan Agarwal - case filed on July 1, 1989. Deoki Nandan Agarwal is a senior advocate and a retired judge of the Allahabad High Court.

Relief Claimed:


- That the disputed structure belongs to the deity Lord Ram.
 
- Injunction against the Waqf board preventing them from interfering in the building of the temple.
 
- Demolishing the existing structure of the Babri Masjid. (This was filed before the demolition of the Babri mosque in 1992)

Security measures:

Across the country, it has been life as usual today, including in Faizabad and Ayodhya, where schools and colleges are also open.

The Centre and the state governments, however, are taking no chances and so security has been tightened in sensitive areas and forces have been mobilised. All political parties and religious groups associated with the dispute have said they will respect the verdict.

There is strict vigil in Faizabad. More than 20,000 securitymen are on alert and there is arrangement for aerial surveys. (Watch: Life in Lucknow, Faizabad normal) I  (Mayawati: Centre didn't give enough forces)

  • 1,90,000 security personnel in Uttar Pradesh

  • 19 places have been identified as "sensitive."

  • Maharashtra, Kerala, Karnataka and Madhya Pradesh have been identified as trouble-prone.

  • Central forces would be 10 minutes away and on call with extensive deployment near sensitive spots.

  • India Air Force aircraft would be on standby to transport troops to eight places across the country.

  • Ban on bulk SMSes continues.

  • No pillion riders and parking not allowed near restricted sites in Delhi, Hyderabad.

India hopes for peace as Ayodhya verdict day arrives

Today is a day of reckoning. How will India react once the Allahabad high court starts pronouncing judgment in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit at 3.30pm today?
“India has moved on, especially the people who were born after 1992 have a different world view,” Union home minister P Chidambaram said. “I don’t foresee any trouble.”
But the government is not taking any chances. The premises of the court’s Lucknow bench have been barricaded, and paramilitary forces deployed in cities, including Mumbai, considered sensitive.
Chidambaram invoked Mahatma Gandhi, quoting him, “Ishwar Allah tero naam, sabko sanmati de Bhagwan (Ishwar, Allah are your names God, give good sense to all, Almighty)”, and appealing to all to cooperate with the government to uphold the values dear to the country.
He said the main political parties have reposed their faith in the due process of law. “Many other organisations connected with the dispute have also affirmed that they would respect the judgment of the court and seek to advance their cause, if so advised, only in accordance with law.
“Many common citizens have also spoken and written in favour of a judicial resolution to the dispute. All these are helpful signs that peace and harmony will prevail.”

Tuesday, September 28, 2010

Supreme Court hearing plea to defer Babri Masjid verdict

New Delhi:  A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia, is hearing a petition right now and is expected to decide today on whether verdict on the Ayodhya land dispute case should be deferred or not.

Last week, on September 23, a Supreme Court interim order had restrained the Allahabad High Court from pronouncing the verdict in the four title suits. The verdict of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court was to have been delivered a day later.  (The Ayodhya dispute: A timeline)

The petition filed before the Supreme Court by retired bureaucrat Ramesh Chand Tripathi has sought that the verdict be deferred to allow the contesting parties to arrive at an out-of-court settlement.

Mukul Rohtagi who is representing Tripathi has argued that the Centre "has acted merely as it is a receiver of the property"- a proactive stand has to be taken by the Centre, he said. 
Last week, for the first time in the 60-year-old case, the union government was made a party to the case and its views will be presented in court by the Attorney General.

Rohtagi argued that the Supreme Court "must experiment to come up with an innovative solution."

A main party in the case- the Nirmohi Akhara - also wants the court to defer the verdict by three months to allow for reconciliation. The Akhara said it would request the Supreme Court to ask for the verdict to be deferred for three months to allow for a solution through negotiations.

But the Central Board of Wakfs, the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board and the All-India Hindu Maha Sabha have pleaded for vacating the stay and allowing the High Court to pronounce the verdict.

"The difference between Mandir group and Masjid group are so diverse. That's why we want the judgement to be pronounced," said Anoop Chaudhri, senior lawyer for Sunni Central Board of Waqf Board, UP.

There are 27 respondents in the case.

If the Supreme Court gives a go-ahead for verdict today, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court will have two days to deliver the verdict. This is because one of the three judges on the bench hearing the title suit, DV Sharma, retires on October 1.

The retiring judge can be given an ad hoc extension, but if that does not happen and verdict is not pronounced before October 1, arguments could have to be heard again and the verdict could be further delayed in the 60-year-old case.

The three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, which is hearing the petition today, comprises of Chief Justice of India SH Kapadia, Justice Aftab Alam and Justice KS Radhakrishnan.