HINDUS' EVIDENCE ON BETTER FOOTING

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."

The court saw a clear evidence of the worship by Hindus in the outer courtyard, which 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 was established, the court said. In connection with the inner courtyard, it observed that 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.

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 demolition 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 by the Centre out of the acquired land or by the Government of Uttar Pradesh within the city of Ayodhya.