The Supreme Court conveyed its clinical approach to the 70-year-old Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute, exhorting the parties on either side of the fence to treat it merely as a “land issue.”
share this post:
Why it is in news?
The Supreme Court conveyed its clinical approach to the 70-year-old Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute, exhorting the parties on either side of the fence to treat it merely as a “land issue.”
Indicating it would not be swayed by the history of religious conflict and violence associated with the Ayodhya site, Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dipak addressed a tense and crowded courtroom, saying “please treat this as a land issue.”
Threeway partition
The Hindu parties and sects involved in the dispute believe Lord Ram was born on this land.
Kar sevaks razed the 15th century Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992.
In September 2010, a three-judge Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court attempted to bring quietus by pronouncing a three-way partition of the disputed site.
But this judgment had only led to appeals and cross appeals filed by parties in the Supreme Court.
Recently,The court warded off third-party intervenors, who said they wanted in as the Ayodhya appeals dealt with an issue that impacted the nation.
But a Bench firmly told them that these were appeals and cross-appeals filed in land suits, and parties concerned were quite capable of arguing them without any third party interventions.
The court then recorded that over 500 exhibits, which include the Bhagavad Gita, Ramayana and documents written in various languages like Sanskrit and Pali, have been filed.
The depositions of 87 witnesses have also been filed along with the Archaeological Survey of India’s reports.
However, some translations are yet to be completed and copies of videos have to be taken.
The court asked the parties to do so in the next two weeks.
Urges dedicated time
The court should dedicate time to the appeals rather than hear them in the one-hour intervals between Constitution Bench hearings.
The practice now in the CJI court is that a five-judge Constitution Bench sits morning and afternoon from Tuesdays to Thursdays.
An hour each is spent on other cases, including PILs, just before the Constitution Bench convenes for the day.
Petitioner did not want that treatment to be meted out to the Ayodhya case.
But a visibly annoyed CJI said these “other cases” are heard in between Constitution Bench hearings because they deal with “over 700 poor litigants waiting for justice”.
