SC to hear Ayodhya title suit in January

Congress accuses BJP of polarising views on Ram Temple issue ahead of polls while it would wait for SC verdict on it; Rahul attacks Modi in MP over handling of Kashmir issue

NEWDELHI: In a move that could see the Ayodhya issue not decided before the Lok Sabha elections, the Supreme Court (SC) on Monday directed the listing of the Ram Janmabhoomi title suit matter for an appropriate bench that will ix the dates in January 2019 for the hearing of a batch of petitions challenging the Allahabad High Court verdict trifurcating the disputed site.

During a brief hearing, a bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph gave its decision on the petitions challenging the 2010 Allahabad High Court ruling by which the disputed site in Ayodhya was divided into three parts − for Ram Lalla, Nirmohi Akhara and the original Muslim litigant.

“We have our own priorities. Whether the case will come in January, February or March, it will be for the appropriate bench to decide,” CJI Gogoi said as a lawyer urged the court to decide on the dates when the hearing on challenge to the High Court judgment will take place.

The listing of the matter for January could prolong the hearing in the case for a few months − by when the country would be in election mode due to general elections due in April-may 2019.

On Sept.27, the top court bench headed by then Chief Justice Dipak Misra, along with Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer, by a 2:1 majority rejected the plea that the challenge to the 2010 verdict be heard by a bench of ive judges.

It was cont ended by the muslim litigants before the three-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice Misra that the challenge to the 2010 verdict should be heard by a larger bench as the High court had relied on 1994 apex court judgment that said that mosque was not essential to Islam for offering Namaz prayers.

Rejecting the plea for hearing by a larger ive-judge bench, then Chief Justice Misra and his colleagues on Sept.27 directed that the matter be listed for Oct.29 hearing.

The three-judge bench while rejecting the plea said, “We are of the considered opinion that no case has been made out to refer the Constitution Bench judgment of this court in Ismail Faruqui case for reconsideration.” “We again make it clear that questionable observations made in the Ismail Faruqui’s case... were made in the context of land acquisition. Those observations were neither relevant for deciding the suits nor relevant for deciding these appeals,” the majority judgement had said.

In his minority judgement, Justice Nazeer had said that the “questionable” observations in the Ismail Faruqui ruling were arrived at without undertaking a comprehensive examination. He had said a Constitution Bench must decide what constitutes essential practices of a religion and thereafter the Ayodhya land dispute should be heard.

The Congress on Monday accused the BJP of polarising views on the Ram Temple issue ahead of Lok Sabha polls while it would wait for the Supreme Court verdict on it.

“Well this is a familiar story. Every ive years before elections, the BJP tries to polarise views on Ram Mandir,” former inance minister P. Chidambaram said at a press conference at the AICC headquarters here shortly after the Supreme Court directed listing of the Ayodhya matter in January next for hearing.

He said the Congress stand on the Ram temple was clear. “Congress party’s position is that the matter is before Supreme Court and everyone should wait until SC decides... I don’t think we should jump the gun,” he said.

Chidambaram was replying to a question on a statement by BJP President Amit Shah and Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath that the Supreme Court has given its judgement in the Sabarimala issue and union minister Giriraj Singh saying that the “patience” of Hindus was running out over the Ram temple issue.