Ayodhya dispute: Final hearing in SC, matter postponed to February
What's the story
The SC had begun the final hearing on the Ayodhya land dispute today, a day before the 25th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition.
A three-judge bench with CJI Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer will hear 13 appeals against the Allahabad HC's 2010 verdict in four related civil suits.
The HC had proposed a three-way division of the disputed land.
Dispute
What is the Babri Masjid/Ram Janmabhoomi dispute?
In December, 1992, thousands of right-wing activists razed down the Babri Masjid, claiming that it was built on a temple; this temple had special significance as it was considered the birth-place of Lord Ram.
Since then, the 16th century site has been disputed.
After the Babri Masjid demolition, the country witnessed Hindu-Muslim riots that killed about 2,000 people.
HC
What was the Allahabad HC's 2010 judgment?
In 2010, Allahabad HC ruled that the disputed land in Ayodhya was Lord Ram's birthplace; additionally, Babri Masjid was built after destroying the temple but was not built according to Islamic tenets.
It ordered a three-way split of the site among the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Lord Ram Lalla.
However, all stakeholders rejected this and appealed in the SC.
Information
Sunni vs Shia waqf boards
Earlier, the Shia Waqf Board suggested a mosque be built at a small distance from the temple so that no Hindu-Muslim conflicts occur. However, the Sunni Waqf Board protested the proposal, claiming to be the only Muslim party privy to the dispute.
Who?
The ones involved in the current hearing
At the ongoing hearing, senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Rajeev Dhavan are representing the Sunni Board; K Parasaran, CS Vaidyanathan and Saurabh Shamsheri are appearing for Lord Ram Lalla; and Anoop George Chaudhari and Sushil Jain will represent the Nirmohi Akhara.
By now, many of the original defendants including Mohd Hashim, the first person to take the issue to the SC, have died.
Hearing
Dispute in filing of documents, bench size
Initially, there were arguments over filing of documents. Sibal argued even the ASI was to file its report, but ASG Tushar Mehra insisted that everyone had been supplied all necessary material.
Sibal and Dhavan requested for a larger five-/seven-judge bench to hear the matter, saying this isn't an ordinary case.
However, Advocate Harish Salve said it should be heard simply as a land dispute.
Timing
Next hearing in February 2018
Sibal argued for hearing the matter after the 2019 elections, saying BJP leader Subramanian Swamy had raised the matter now for his "political agenda".
Vaidyanathan agreed, saying politics shouldn't interfere in the matter.
CJI Misra noted all the arguments by different parties.
The next hearing has been scheduled for February 8, 2018. Till then, the registrar will keep track of the filing of documents.