The Supreme Court will commence final hearing in the long-standing Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute from tomorrow, a day before the 25th anniversary of the demolition of medieval-era structure. A specially constituted bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer will be hearing a total of 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgement of the Allahabad High Court in four civil suits. The high court had then ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acre area at Ayodhya among the parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Lord Ram Lalla. [caption id=“attachment_4205361” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] Representational image. AFP[/caption] A sect of Muslims, under the banner of Shia Central Waqf Board of Uttar Pradesh, had earlier approached the court offering a solution that a mosque could be built in a Muslim-dominated area at a “reasonable distance” from the disputed site in Ayodhya. However, its intervention was opposed by the All India Sunni Waqf Board which had claimed that judicial adjudication between the two sects had already been done in 1946 by declaring the mosque, which was demolished on 6 December, 1992, as one which belongs to the Sunnis. Recently a group of civil rights activists also moved the apex court seeking intervention in the Ayodhya dispute and urged it to consider the issue saying it is not just a dispute over property but has several other aspects which would have far-reaching effects on the “secular fabric of the country”. In pursuance to the apex court’s earlier direction, the Yogi Adityanath government has submitted English translation of exhibits and documents likely to be relied upon, as these were in eight different languages. A battery of high profile lawyers including senior advocates K Parasaran and CS Vaidyanathan and advocate Saurabh Shamsheri will appear for Lord Ram Lalla, the deity, and Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta will represent the Uttar Pradesh government. Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Anoop George Chaudhari, Rajeev Dhavan and Sushil Jain will represent other parties including All India Sunni Waqf Board and Nirmohi Akhara. The top court had on 11 August asked the UP government to complete within 10 weeks the translation of the evidence recorded for adjudication of the title dispute in the high court. It had said it would not allow the matter to take any shape other than the civil appeals and would adopt the same procedure as was done by the high court. BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, an intervenor in the matter, had attempted to raise the issue of fundamental right of religion of the Hindus under Article 25 of the Constitution. Many of the original plantiffs and defendants in the matter including Mohd Hashim, who was the first person to take the matter to the apex court, have died. A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Hourt, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had said the land be partitioned equally among three parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
Ayodhya verdict updates: SC defers hearing to 8 Feb 2018 after Sunni board seeks 'reasonable' time to file documents
The high court had then ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acre area at Ayodhya among the parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Lord Ram Lalla.
 "Ayodhya verdict updates: SC defers hearing to 8 Feb 2018 after Sunni board seeks 'reasonable' time to file documents")
Ayodhya dispute: 25 years on, shift in political ground reality; resolution does not look far away
Perhaps no political episode in Indian history is reflective of the collective ambivalence of the Indian polity as much as the Ayodhya dispute. It is a saga of indiscretions by constitutional entities, Judiciary and political personalities.
Rajiv Gandhi had gambled on Hindu consolidation big time by unlocking the disputed site in 1986. But he was equally not willing to let go of the Muslim constituency. However, he was not alone in handling this issue in a manner not expected of the prime minister’s position.
**_Read the full article here_**High security in Ayodhya ahead of Babri Masjid demolition anniversary
#Visuals of high security from #Ayodhya ahead of 25th anniversary of Babri demolition tomorrow pic.twitter.com/HwmAPMqS5j
— ANI UP/Uttarakhand (@ANINewsUP) December 5, 2017
Meanwhile, MHA issues advisory to states ahead of Babri demolition anniversary
#BREAKING - MHA issues advisory to states ahead of Babri structure demolition anniversary. Asks all states and Union Territories to take steps to maintain communal harmony pic.twitter.com/1vPdQAmOxj
— News18 (@CNNnews18) December 5, 2017
Babri case can’t be decided on ‘aastha’: Asaduddin Owaisi
MIM chief Asaduddin Owaisi has said that the title suit of the Babri Masjid can be decided only on the basis of evidence and not on ‘aastha’ (faith) as the Sangh Parivar is demanding.
Owaisi condemned the statements by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad leaders that the construction of the Ram temple will begin on 18 October, 2018 how they could make such a statement when the title suit was still pending in the Supreme Court.
SC defers hearing to 8 Feb 2018 after Sunni board seeks ‘reasonable’ time to file documents
The Supreme Court has deferred the hearing in the case to 8 February, 2018, after the petitioners asked for reasonable time to translate and file all the relevant documents. The apex court said that this would be the last opportunity for the petitioners to get papers ready and no delays would be allowed after this. The Supreme Court also directed all advocates on record of the appeals to sit together and ensure that all documents are filed and numbered.
Sunni Waqf Board requests for a larger bench to hear matter
Ayodhya dispute: Advocates Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan along with other petitioner counsels want a larger bench of atleast 7 Judges to hear this matter.
— ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017
SC takes on record Shia Waqf Board’s compromise formula
Shia Waqf Board member Wasim Rizvi said that the Shia Waqf Board had worked out a compromise formula, including the building of a temple at disputed site and building of a mosque in Lucknow.
Supreme Court took on record the compromise formula as suggested by Shia Waqf Board: Wasim Rizvi, Shia Waqf Board #SibalMandirTrap pic.twitter.com/5M9dvnFbiu
— News18 (@CNNnews18) December 5, 2017
Sunni Waqf Board requests time to translate, file all exhibits
Petitioners are pleading in SC for reasonable time to translate, file and serve the copies of all the exhibits and relevant documents, which were filed before the Allahabad High Court bench at Lucknow.
A look at key litigants who would no longer be part of SC hearing
The key litigants in the 25-year-old Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri mosque dispute will not be part of the final proceedings in the Supreme Court.
The temple-mosque dispute reached the local court in 1949 when Mahant Ramchandradas Paramhans approached it for allowing ‘darshan and pujan’ of Ramlalla. In the same city, Hashim Ansari, a resident of Kotia locality, about 1.5 kilometre from the disputed site – also approached the court for removing the Lord Rama statue from the Babri mosque.
While Mahant Paramhans died on 20 July 2003, Ansari died in July 2016.
Congress disassociates itself from Kapil Sibal’s arguments in case
Speaking to CNN-News18, Congress leader Brijesh Kalappa said that Indian National Congress was not a party in the case. He asserted that any arguments made by Congress leader Kapil Sibal are made in his capacity as a professional lawyer. It does not represents the views of the party.
#Watch: Teesta Setalvad’s take on the Babri case
#PeaceInAyodhya Teesta Setalvad speaks on CJP's judicial intervention in the Supreme Court of India on the Babri Ma… https://t.co/MPUnEfCUvr
— Teesta Setalvad (@TeestaSetalvad) December 1, 2017
Activist Teesta Setalvad files intervention; requests to be made party in the case
Activist Teesta Setalvad has requested the Supreme Court to not see the case as a normal land title dispute case and keep in mind the larger bearing of the demolition of Babri Masjid in mind. She also requested to be mande a party in the case.
Meanwhile…. Devotees of Ram pray for favourable verdict
'Hawan' organised in #Ayodhya for construction of Ram temple pic.twitter.com/GadKFXVXZF
— ANI UP/Uttarakhand (@ANINewsUP) December 5, 2017
Kapil Sibal, on behalf of Sunni Waqf Board, requests bench to postpone hearing
Kapil Sibal requested that the hearing should begin after the Lok Sabha polls of 2019, arguing that all exhibits have not been shared with them.
Kapil Sibal, questions how 19,000 page-long document could be filed in such a short time
Kapil Sibal, who is representing Sunni Waqf Board, raised doubts over ASG Mehta’s claim that all exhibits have been submitted. SIbal asks how more than 19000 pages of documents can be filed in such short time. Sibal also told the apex court that he and other petitioners have not been provided with copies of all relevant documents.
ASG Tushar Mehta rebuts Sibal’s assertions
Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Tushar Mehta, representing the state of Uttar Pradesh rebuts the assertions made by Sibal. Mehta, told Supreme Court that all the related documents and requisite translation copies are on record.
Kapil SIbal says all exhibits filed in Allahabad HC not filed in Supreme Course
In the Supreme Court, senior advocate Kapil Sibal is reading out the details of exhibits filed by the contesting defendants before the Allahabad High Court. He tells the three-judge bench that all these exhibits are not filled before this court.He submitted, all the pleadings are not complete.
Three-judge constitutional bench hearing the controversial case
A specially constituted bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer will be hearing a total of 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgement of the Allahabad High Court in four civil suits.
The high court had then ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acre area at Ayodhya among the parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Lord Ram Lalla.
A Three Judge Bench of CJI Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer starts hearing #Ayodhya land dispute case
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) December 5, 2017
SC begins hearing 25-yr-old case
Supreme Court begins hearing in #Ayodhya dispute case pic.twitter.com/DefkmOdqrF
— ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017
'21 Maoists surrendered in Chhattisgarh', Amit Shah vows to eradicate menace by March 26
21 Maoists, including 13 senior cadres, surrendered in Chhattisgarh. The surrender included 13 women ultras and 18 weapons. Officials view the surrender as a significant victory for counter-insurgency efforts.
More Impact Shorts "‘I’d love to do it’: Trump refuses to rule out third term — despite constitutional limit")
 "What is the ‘Golden Fleet’ of navy ships that Trump wants to counter China with?")
 "‘Ramayan country’: Why Trinidad and Tobago wants to build a large Ram temple")
 "How China's rare earths choke changed America's trade deals")
 "‘I’d love to do it’: Trump refuses to rule out third term — despite constitutional limit")
 "What is the ‘Golden Fleet’ of navy ships that Trump wants to counter China with?")
 "‘Ramayan country’: Why Trinidad and Tobago wants to build a large Ram temple")
 "How China's rare earths choke changed America's trade deals")
Top Shows
