A case related to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land title case has found closure in the Supreme Court today with a three-judge bench led by CJI Dipak Misra and comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer refusing to refer to a larger bench the issue of a 1994 ruling that said mosques were not necessary for practice of Islam. Justice Nazeer, however, disagreed with the majority judgement.
Below is a summary of what happened and its impact in future:
1. The 1994 ruling
In 1994 ruling by the Supreme Court came in a case related to acquisition of land in and around the Babri Masjid. The Supreme Court observed that a mosque was not an essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam and namaz could be offered anywhere, even in the open.
2. The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case
In 2010, the Allahabad High Court ruled in the Ram Janamabhoomi-Babri Masjid land title case that the Ayodhya ..
3. Objection to the 1994 ruling
The issue of 1994 ruling came up when a three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra was hearing the appeals against the Allahabad High Court’s 2010 verdict. The Muslim parties to the title suit said the 1994 ruling prejudiced their claim. In the Allahabad High Court verdict, the the land under the dome has gone to the Hindus. The Muslim parties wanted the 1994 ruling to be reconsidered by a five-judge bench. This SC has refused to re ..
4. Implication
The issue of 1994 ruling had delayed the hearing in the title case. Now the hearing will start on October 29. The most important implication of the SC order on 1994 ruling issue could be speeding up of the title case. Many believe a judgement in favour of the Hindu parties before the 2019 general elections could go in the favour of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) which had promised construction of the Ram Temple in its manifesto.
In December last year, lawyer and Congress politician Kapil Sibal had asked the court to defer hearing of the title case till completion of the 2019 Lok Sabha elections.
