Login Register
Follow Us

6 more petitions seeking review of Ayodhya verdict filed in SC

NEW DELHI: On the 27th anniversary of demolition of Babri Masjid, as many as six petitions were filed in the Supreme Court on Friday seeking review of its verdict which paved the way for construction of a Ram temple at Ayodhya.

Show comments

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, December 6

On the 27th anniversary of demolition of Babri Masjid, as many as six petitions were filed in the Supreme Court on Friday seeking review of its verdict which paved the way for construction of a Ram temple at Ayodhya by decreeing the title of the disputed site in favour of Ram Lalla.

Review petitioners Maulana Mufti Hasbullah, Moulana Mahfoozur Rehman, Mishbahuddin, Mohd Umar and Haji Nahboob—all supported by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)—and Mohammad Ayub contended that the November 9 judgment by a five-judge Bench was full of contradictions.

“At the outset, it must be stated that the purpose of this review petition is not to disturb the peace of this great nation but in the spirit that any peace must be conducive to justice. In respect of this case, Muslims have always maintained the peace but Muslims and their properties have been victim of violence and unfairness treatment. This review is part of a quest for justice,” read one of the review petitions.

However, the petitioners contended that “Title could not have been given to Hindu parties on the basis of exclusive possession of entire site which never existed at any point in time with the Hindus since it is admitted that Muslims entered and prayed at the site till December, 1949 and later prevented from doing so because of the attachment while unfairly permitting Hindu worship following criminal trespass.”

They attacked the SC verdict on the ground that it sanctioned serious illegalities of destruction, criminal trespass and violation of rule of law that led to destruction of the mosque in 1992.

The five-judge bench headed by then CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justice SA Bobde (current CJI), Justice DY Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazeer had on November 9 given the 2.77-acre disputed land to Ram Lalla. It had given five acre land to Muslims at an alternative site at Ayodhya for construction of a new mosque.

The first review petition in the matter was filed in the top court by Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi, legal heir of original litigant M Siddiq and also the Uttar Pradesh president of the Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind on December 2. He contended that “complete justice” could only be done by ordering reconstruction of the Babri Masjid.

While key litigant, Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Wakf Board, decided against challenging the verdict, Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi has sought review of the verdict on 14 counts.

In his review plea which was filed on Friday, Maulana Mufti Hasbullah said the top court should reconsider the “grave injustice” to a community in a title suit.

“Title could not have been given to Hindu parties on the basis of exclusive possession of entire site which never existed at any point in time with the Hindus since it is admitted that Muslims entered and prayed at the site till December 1949, and later prevented from doing so because of the attachment while unfairly permitting Hindu worship following criminal trespass,” Hasbullah said in his plea.

“The judgment erred in accepting the juristic personality of the idol entitled it to the 3-domed structure and the courtyard while holding that the idol was illegally and forcibly put there. An idol as deity cannot be simultaneously illegally placed and legally valid to claim the title,” the plea said.

It said since it is undisputed that Muslims were praying on the site till December 16, 1949 and entered the Mosque through the outer courtyard, this fact proves that the Hindus were never in exclusive possession.

Show comments
Show comments

Top News

Most Read In 24 Hours