The Supreme Court on Thursday said it has to find the context in which the five-judge bench had delivered the 1994 judgment stating that a mosque was not integral to Islam which arose during the hearing of the Ayodhya land dispute. The three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra pronounced the verdict on Ayodhya land dispute case. Declining the matter to refer to a larger bench, Justice Ashok Bhushan and CJI Misra has fixed the matter for further hearing on October 29. Justice Ashok Bhushan read the judgment for himself and the CJI.
A five-judge bench of the Supreme Court in its 1994 Ismail Faruqui judgment said that mosque did not constitute an essential part of Islam. Post that, the Allahabad High Court had in 2010 ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of land, which was challenged by Muslim litigants seeking direction that a larger Constitution bench hear the clutch of petitions in the case.
A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had on September 30, 2010, ordered that the land should be partitioned equally among three parties - the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
Here are the highlights on Ayodhya Verdict:
14:29 pm: Nazeer refers to observations of HC judge S A Khan to highlight that the mosque is not integral to Islam.
14:28 pm: Questionable observation of 1994 verdict has permeated into Allahabad High Court's decision in land dispute case: Js Nazeer.
14:27 pm: CJI Dipak Misra and Justice Bhushan fix the Ayodhya matter for hearing on October 29.
14:27 pm: Justice Nazeer refers to recent SC decision on female genital mutilation and says present matter be heard by a larger bench.
14:26 pm: Whether the mosque is integral to Islam to be decided considering belief in religion, requires detailed consideration: Justice Nazeer.
14:24 pm: Justice S A Nazeer disagrees with CJI and Justice Bhushan.
14:23 pm: Supreme Court to begin hearing on Ayodhya matter from October 29, 2018, to decide the suit on merit.
Supreme Court to begin hearing on Ayodhya matter from October 29, 2018 to decide the suit on merit. pic.twitter.com/du5499fGvs— ANI (@ANI) September 27, 2018
14:21 pm: Civil suit has to be decided on basis of evidence and the previous verdict has no relevance: Bhushan
14:20 pm: Ayodhya matter (Ismail Faruqui case): All religions and religious places need to be equally respected. Ashoka's edicts preach tolerance to the faith of others, says Justice Ashok Bhushan.
14:14 pm: Ayodhya land dispute case will not be referred to a larger bench: Justice Bhushan on behalf of him and CJI Dipak Misra.
14:11 pm: All religions have to be respected equally by the State, says Justice Bhushan.
14:10 pm: Constitution bench judgement was confined to the acquisition of land: Justice Bhushan.
14:09 pm: Ayodhya matter (Ismail Faruqui case): Justice Ashok Bhushan says there are two opinions - one by Justice Bhushan and CJI Dipak Misra, and second by Justice S Nazeer.
14:05 pm: Justice Ashok Bhushan reading judgement for himself and Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra.
14:04 pm: The Supreme Court will deliver its verdict on the below-mentioned cases.
14:03 pm: Supreme Court starts pronouncing the verdict on Ayodhya dispute matter
13:40 pm: Uttar Pradesh Deputy CM Keshav Prasad Maurya sparked off controversies after he proposed to bring a legislation to build Ram Mandir in Ayodhya if SC verdict against it.
13:36 pm: Uttar Pradesh Shia Waqf Board chief Waseem Rizvi said, "Babri advocates had brought this year-old matter for the inconvenience of the court, but today the Supreme Court is expected to clear the picture on whether praying in the mosque is an integral part of Islam or not".
The Babri Masjid was built by Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya back in 1528. Later on December 6, 1992, Hindu Karsevaks destroyed the mosque during a political rally claiming that the Ram temple, situated in the land was actually demolished to construct the mosque.
Though there was no such evidence that the disputed structure was constructed after the temple demolition, the court agreed that a temple or a temple structure predated the mosque at the same site. Moreover, the excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India also suggested that the predating structure was a massive Hindu religious building. Since then the matter has been in the light and turned into a political riot in India.