LIVE UPDATES:
SC adjourns matter for January 2019
Ahead of the Ayodhya land dispute case hearing in Supreme Court, Union minister Giriraj Singh said that Hindus are losing patience.
Ab Hinduon ka sabr tut raha hai. Mujhe bhay hai ki Hinduon ka sabr tuta toh kya hoga: Union Minister Giriraj Singh on #RamTemple matter pic.twitter.com/XqWsuIk8lJ
— ANI (@ANI) October 29, 2018
Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) earlier this month said that it can no longer wait for the Supreme Court to deliver its verdict in the Ram Janmbhoomi case because it has already “waited for too long”. Addressing a press conference, VHP’s international working president Alok Kumar said, “I think the Supreme Court neglected its duty. We have waited for long, now we cannot wait.” It urged the Modi government to bring in an ordinance to facilitate construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya.
A 3-judge bench led by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi will hear the case today.
I think we should take a review in December to see if Ram Temple matter is going to be quickly adjourned or again Congress lawyers will find some other interlocutory application to delay the matter. If it’s going to be delayed then we’ll have to take a call, says Subramanian Swamy.
Hearing to begin from 11 AM.
The Supreme Court is all set to hear a batch of petitions challenging the Allahabad High Court’s 2010 verdict on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute in few hours.
A three-judge bench, comprising of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and KM Joseph will hear the matter.
In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had divided the disputed land on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid area into three parts. In a 2:1 majority ruling, the court ordered that the 2.77 acres of land be partitioned equally among three parties – the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
On September 27, the apex court had declined to refer to a five-judge constitution bench the issue of reconsideration of the observations in its 1994 judgment. In a majority verdict of 2:1, a three-judge bench headed by then chief justice Dipak Misra had said the civil suit has to be decided on the basis of evidence and the previous verdict has no relevance to this issue.
Justice Ashok Bhushan, who had penned the judgment for himself and the Chief Justice of India, had said it has to find out the context in which the five-judge bench had delivered the 1994 verdict.
However, Justice S Abdul Nazeer had disagreed with the two judges and had said whether a mosque is integral to Islam has to be decided considering religious belief which requires detailed consideration.
The top court bench while rejecting the plea challenging the High Court judgment had directed that the matter would be heard by a three-judge bench from October 29.
