Ayodhya Ram Mandir History: From the supposed demolition of a temple in the Mughal era to the fervent campaigns for its reconstruction in independent India, the Ram Temple has been at the epicentre of a cultural and communal tapestry that has unfolded over the course of generations.
The hearing in the politically and religiously sensitive decades-old temple-mosque land dispute in Ayodhya was the second longest proceedings in the history of the Supreme Court which had lasted for 40 days. The high voltage hearing in the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute involving 2.77 acres of land had commenced on August 6 and concluded on October 16, and the apex court pronounced the verdict on Saturday.
The spiritual head of Ajmer dargah on Saturday welcomed the decision of the Supreme Court on Ayodhya case and appealed to people to maintain peace and harmony. The apex court on Saturday cleared the way for the construction of a Ram Temple at the disputed site at Ayodhya and directed the Centre to allot a 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque.
The Supreme Court is going to deliver the verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case of Ayodhya on Saturday at 10.30 a.m. After completing the hearing in the case, the apex court had reserved its decision and since then, it was speculated that the decision will come before the retirement of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi.
The Supreme Court on Monday allowed Muslim parties, including UP Sunni Wakf Board, to file their written note in the decades-old Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, in which they have submitted that the verdict will have "consequences" for the future polity of the country.
Plaintiff Iqbal Ansari has said that he would accept the Supreme Court decision in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit and would not file any petition challenging the verdict.
The Ayodhya title dispute may come to an end today with final submissions in the Supreme Court. Both Hindu and Muslim sides will conclude their arguments before the five-judge constitution bench -- CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice SA Bobde, Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice SA Nazeer.
Considered as one of the leaders who spearheaded the Ram Mandir agitation, Kalyan Singh said that he will only answer to the court, and not to anyone else about the demolition of Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992.
A five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi told senior advocate Kapil Sibal, representing Dhavan, that the contempt plea would be taken up. "It will be listed for hearing tomorrow," the bench, which also includes justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer, said.
The Supreme Court today said the mediation proceedings in the Ayodhya land dispute case did not come to any outcome. The hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case will now be taken up on a daily basis from August 6, the Supreme Court said. The apex court had on July 11 sought a report on the mediation process and said that a day-to-day hearing might commence from July 25 if the court decides to conclude the mediation proceedings.
The Supreme Court on Friday said the verdict on 1992 Babri Masjid demolition case should be delivered with 9 months. BJP veterans such as LK Advani, MM Joshi and Uma Bharti are accused in the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid land dispute case. The bench also directed the Uttar Pradesh government to pass appropriate orders within four weeks to extend the tenure of the special judge, who is set to retire on September 30.
The Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute has been a socio-religious debate in India for decades. It focusses on a plot of land in Ayodhya, a city located in Faizabad district of Uttar Pradesh. The site has been regarded holy among Hindus, who believe it to be the birthplace of Lord Ram.
Earlier on January 27, the apex court had cancelled the scheduled hearing for January 29, due to the unavailability of Justice SA Bobde.
Earlier, the case was being heard by a Bench of then Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazeer.
Justice S Abdul Nazeer, however, said whether a mosque is integral to Islam has to be decided considering belief and requires detailed consideration.
A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had in 2010 ordered that the land be partitioned equally among three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
Katiyar's controversial statement came hours after Subramanian Swamy wrote a letter to the prime minister, recommending an ordinance on Ram Mandir.
During the last hearing in February, the apex court had said it will deal the case as a pure land dispute and refused to hear it on day-to-day basis.
After the meeting, the AOL said eminent members of the Sunni Waqf Board, All India Muslim Personal Law Board and others met Ravi Shankar and expressed support for an out-of-court settlement in the Ayodhya matter.
Top News
