Disputed land for Ram Mandir

The five judges of Constitutional bench of Supreme Court has pronounced the judgment in Ayodhya case today.

The unanimous verdict was given by a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and comprising Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

The judgment was not given on the basis of religious belief and sentiments but was given solely on Legal Aspects of the disputed land.

The bench has held that entire disputed land  of 2.77 acres in Ayodhya must be handover for construction of Ram Mandir. At the same time, the Court also held that an alternate land of 5 acres must be allotted to the Sunni Waqf Board for construction of mosque.

TAX LAWYER 

At the outset, the Bench observed,

“This Court set up under the Constitutional scheme should defer from interfering with the faith and belief of worshippers. Secularism is basic feature of the Constitution.”

Some Important Qoutes 

“The underlying structure which provided the foundations of the mosque together with its architectural features and recoveries are suggestive of a Hindu religious origin comparable to temple excavations in the region and pertaining to the era.”

“While the ASI report has found the existence of ruins of a preexisting structure, the report does not provide: (a) The reason for the destruction of the pre-existing structure; and (b) Whether the earlier structure was demolished for the purpose of the construction of the mosque.”

“The Hindus have been in exclusive and unimpeded possession of the outer courtyard where they have continued worship”

“The inner courtyard has been a contested site with conflicting claims of the Hindus and Muslims”

“The damage to the mosque in 1934, its desecration in 1949 leading to the ouster of the Muslims and the eventual destruction on 6 December 1992 constituted a serious violation of the rule of law”

Read Full Judgment Click Here 

Nature and Scope of Article 136 of the Constitution