As the nation awaits the Supreme Court judgement in one of the oldest and most contentious matters of independent India – the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit in Ayodhya – another related case might see a verdict from a court in Lucknow not so long afterwards.
This second case pertains directly to the demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992 and the alleged criminal conspiracy behind it. After 27 years of often-derailed investigations and trial, the matter has finally reached the concluding stages of hearing in a special CBI court in Lucknow.
Here’s what Supreme Court said:
# Supreme Court dismissed appeal of Shia Waqf Board appeal, pronounces unanimous verdict in the case.
# Shia Waqf board’s claim was over the disputed structure which is dismissed by Supreme Court.
# Supreme Court said that the disputed land was the government land in the revenue records.
# Supreme Court held that Nirmohi Akhara’s suit is barred by limitation, not a ‘Shebait’ or devotee of deity Ram Lalla.
# Supreme Court said that terming the archeological evidence as merely an opinion would be a great disservice to the ASI.
# Supreme Court said Babri mosque was not built on vacant land. The underlying structure was not an Islamic structure.
# Supreme Court said that the fact that there lied a temple beneath the destroyed structure has been established by the ASI.
# ASI had not established whether temple was demolished to build the mosque, said Supreme Court.
# Hindus consider this place as birthplace of lord Ram, even Muslims say this about disputed place, said Supreme Court.
# Faith of Hindus that Lord Rama was born at demolished structure is undisputed, Supreme Court ruled.
# Supreme Court said the existence of Sita Rasoi, Ram Chabutra and Bhandar grih are the testimony of the religious fact of the place.
# The top court said title cannot be established on ground of faith, belief; they are kind of indicator for deciding dispute.
# UP Sunni Central Waqf Board has failed to establish its case in Ayodhya dispute. On the contrary, Hindus established their case that they were in possession of outer courtyard, said Supreme Court.
# Supreme Court directed allotment of alternative land to Muslims to build new mosque.
# Supreme Court asked Centre to frame scheme within three months and set up a trust for construction of a temple. Possession of disputed 2.77 acre land will remain with Central government receiver, rules Supreme Court.