No review of mosque order, main Ayodhya hearing next
RULING By not revisiting 1994 verdict, SC paves way for a possible closure of one of India’s most contentious cases
NEWDELHI: The Supreme Court on Thursday paved the way for resumption of the hearing of the Ramjanmabhoomi-babri Masjid title dispute case and refused to constitute a larger bench to revisit the 1994 verdict that said a “mosque is not essential to the practise of Islam”.
The judgment cuts short the timeline to a possible closure of what is now just a straightforward land dispute case — the complex and broader issue of a mosque not being integral to Islam will now not be reconsidered. The verdict is a shot in the arm for the Bharatiya Janata Party, analysts said, because it can now go to the state elections later this year and the parliamentary elections next year with something to show. A temple in Ayodhya remains on the agenda of the party.
“Among the BJP’S core voters, too, there was a suspicion that the party was merely using it as an issue but was not committed to building the temple. The court’s decision paves the way for a final verdict, and allows the BJP to tell its base that the final moment is close. There are still people who suspect BJP’S use of the issue. But this allows the party to try to consolidate Hindus and polarise in election season,” said professor Badri Narayan of Allahabad’s GB Pant Institute of Social Sciences.
The three-judge bench led by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, in a 2:1 verdict, clarified that the “statement” in the 1994 judgment on the “mosque” by a Constitution Bench of five judges was in the limited context of acquisition of land where a religious structure stands.
Justice Ashok Bhushan authored the verdict for himself and the CJI, and ordered listing of the main case in the week starting October 29, fast-tracking its hearing. With CJI Misra retiring on October 2, a new three-judge bench would be constituted by next CJI Ranjan Gogoi. Allahabad high court begins hearing on determining who owns the disputed site
Sep 30: In a 2:1 majority verdict, HC rules the disputed area will be divided among Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla
May 9: Supreme Court stays HC verdict on Ayodhya land dispute
Feb 26: Subramanian Swamy files plea in SC seeking the construction of Ram Temple at the disputed site
Mar 21: Then CJI JS Khehar suggests out-of-court settlement among rival parties Aug 7: SC constitutes three-judge bench to hear pleas challenging the 1994 verdict Feb 8: SC starts hearing civil appeals
Mar 14: SC rejects all interim pleas, including Swamy's, seeking to intervene as parties Apr 6: Rajeev Dhavan files plea in SC to refer the issue of reconsideration of the observations in its 1994 judgment to a larger bench
Jul 20: SC reserves verdict
Sep 27: SC declines to refer the case to a five-judge bench, says civil suit in main case will be heard from October 29