Ayodhya Case Verdict
View PDF | Print View
by: Admin
Total views: 276
Word Count: 954
The Allahabad High Court on Thursday ruled by a majority verdict that the disputed land in Ayodhya be divided equally into three parts among Hindus and Muslims and that the place where the makeshift temple of Lord Ram exists belongs to Hindus. In their separate judgements on the sensitive 60-year-old title dispute on Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid structure, Justices S.U. Khan and Sudhir Agarwal said that the area under the central dome of the three-domed structure where Lord Ram’s idol exists belongs to Hindus. The majority in the three-judge Lucknow bench also ruled that status quo should be maintained at the disputed place for three months. Justices Khan and Agarwal decreed that the 2.7-acre land comprising the disputed site should be divided into three equal parts and be given to Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and the party representing ‘Ram Lalla Virajman’ (the Ram deity). However, the third judge Justice D.V. Sharma ruled that that the disputed site is the birth place of Lord Ram and that the disputed building constructed by Mughal emperor Babar was built against the tenets of Islam and did not have the character of the mosque. "Joint title owners" Justice Khan said “all the three sets of parties, i.e. Muslims, Hindus and Nirmohi Akhara are declared joint title holders of the property/premises in dispute as described by letters A B C D E F in the map Plan—I prepared by Shri Shiv Shankar Lal, Pleader/Commissioner appointed by court in Suit No. 1 to the extent of 1/3rd share each for using and managing the same for worshipping. A preliminary decree to this effect is passed.” However, the judge observed that it is further declared that the portion below the central dome where at present the idol is kept in makeshift temple will be allotted to Hindus in final decree. He also said that Nirmohi Akhara will be allotted share including that part which is shown by the words ‘Ram Chabutra’ and ‘Sita Rasoi’ in the said map. Justice Khan said even though all the three parties are declared to have one-third share each, “however, if while allotting exact portions, some minor adjustments in the share is to be made, then the same will be made and the adversely-affected party may be compensated by some portion of the adjoining land which has been acquired by the central government.” Mosque built on temple's ruins, not by demolishing temple: Justice Khan In his gist of findings, Justice Khan observed that the disputed structure was constructed as mosque by or under the orders of Babar but it is not proved by direct evidence that the premises in dispute including constructed portion belonged to Babar or the person who built it. He also said that no temple was demolished for constructing the mosque as it was built over the ruins of temple which was lying for a very long time. Idol shall not be obstructed: Justice Agarwal In his judgement, Justice Agarwal said “it is declared that the area covered by the central dome of the three-domed structure, i.e., the disputed structure being the deity of Bhagwan Ram Janamsthan and place of birth of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of Hindus belong to plaintiffs (party on behalf of Lord Rama) and shall not be obstructed or interfered in any manner by the defendants.” He also observed that the area within the inner courtyard excepting some portion belongs to members of both the communities, Hindus and Muslims, since it was being used by both since decades and centuries. “It is, however, made clear that the for the purpose of share of plaintiffs (parties on behalf of Lord Rama) under this direction”, the area which is covered by central dome of the three-domed structure, shall also be included, he said. Justice Agarwal said the area covered by structures Ram Chabutra, Sita Rasoi and Bhandar in the outer courtyard is declared in the share of Nirmohi Akhara and they shall be entitled to possession thereof, in the absence of any person with better title. Chaos at media centre after verdict Pandemonium broke out at the special media room set up in Lucknow shortly after the Allahabad High Court verdict on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute was pronounced. As soon as the three-judge bench comprising Justices D.V. Sharma, Sudhir Agarwal and S.U. Khan, delivered their verdict, lawyers of the litigants rushed to the media centre and began giving their interpretations on the verdict. At least 20 lawyers were on the dais giving their versions of the verdict in the 60-year-old title suit on the ownership of the piece of land where the Babri Masjid built in 1528 once stood. Lawyers from both sides showed the victory sign. The media jostled hard to hear them but with many speaking at the same time, there was utter confusion. With synopsis of the judgements not being made available immediately, the scribes had to go by what the lawyers said. Over 600 journalists from across the country had gathered at the District Magistrate’s office in Qaiserbagh area in Lucknow to report on the High Court verdict. At least 40 outdoor broadcast (OB) vans of various television channels were stationed in the compound to beam live the developments. Several shops and business establishments, which were open earlier in the day, downed their shutters as the day progressed. Inside the court premises, the passage leading to Court No. 21, where the verdict in the six-decade-old case was pronounced, was cordoned off and entry allowed only to the parties to the dispute and their lawyers. Heavy presence of police personnel was seen on the way near Court Nos. 18, 19 and 20 and the special Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid section near Court No. 21.
About the Author
P. Raja Rajeswaran
SM / Samudram / Madurai Division / SR
Rating: Not yet rated
Login to vote