In the Ayodhya dispute case, the Supreme Court on Saturday gave the historic order, ordering the construction of the temple at the disputed site. The court asked the Central Government to constitute the Board of Trustees within 3 months and give the disputed site for the construction of the temple. The court also ordered that the central government asked the Sunni Waqf Board to give 5 acres of alternative land in Ayodhya to build the mosque.
The Supreme Court rejected the Nirmohi Akhara claim but ordered the Center to be given proper representation in the Board of Trustees to be constructed for the temple. The Board of Trustees will decide how the temple will be constructed.
Central Government to build trust in 3 months
The Supreme Court said in its judgment that Muslims could not prove from their evidence that they had a monopoly over the disputed land. The Supreme Court said that the Allahabad High Court’s order of sharing of land and giving a share to the Sunni Waqf Board was wrong.
CJI Ranjan Gogoi presided and Justice S.K. a. A 5-judge constitutional bench of members comprising Bobde, Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazeer ruled.
The Supreme Court also praised the role of the judges (retired) Kalifullah, Shriram Panchu and Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, the arbitrators of the Ayodhya case. The court said that the arbitrators had come very close to reconciliation in this case.
‘The disputed land belongs to Ramlala, Sunni side to land elsewhere’
Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said in the judgment that faith does not prove the title. There is no evidence to offer Namaz at the disputed site until 1856-57. Hindus also worshiped in the interior before this. Hindus have been worshiping outside for centuries.
The Sunni Waqf Board should be given 5 acres of land elsewhere. The court said that the central government should formulate a trust for the construction of the temple in 3 months and put the scheme in place. Nirmohi Akhara will also get representation in this trust. The Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court finally gave the ownership of 2.77 acres of land to Ramlala Virajaman. The court further said that people of every religion given equal respect in the constitution.
High court verdict not logical: SC
Earlier SC said that Namaz was read till 16 December 1949. In Title Suit No. 4 (Sunni Waqf Board) and 5 (Ramlala Virajaman) we have to balance. The three sides which the High Court had considered would have to be considered in two parts. The court said that it was not logical for the High Court to divide the land into three parts. Ramlala Virajman and Sunni Waqf Board were now two parties in the case.
Hindus also worshiped in the interior before 1856: SC
SC said that the title is not just proved by faith. The SC main party is following Ramlala Virajaman and the Sunni Waqf Board. The Sunni side has demanded that the place be declared a mosque. There is no evidence to offer Namaz at the disputed site until 1856-57. The Muslim side said that namaz was being performed continuously there.
The court stated that before 1856 Hindus also worshiped in the interior. On stopping, they started worshiping on the platform. The British had built railings to keep the two parts separate. Yet Hindus considered the sanctum sanctorum below the main dome.