Ayodhya dispute: SC adjourns hearing to February 8, Kapil Sibal wants appeals to be heard after 2019 Lok Sabha polls 

The bench took serious note of the submission of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing Sunni Waqf Board, that the matter be heard only in July 2019, after the completion of the next Lok Sabha polls citing political ramifications.

By: Express Web Desk | New Delhi | Updated: December 5, 2017 6:35 pm
SC adjourns hearing in Ayodhya dispute case to February 2018 As the media waits for a word on the ongoing Ram Janmabhoomi case at the supreme court in New Delhi, a member of a plaintiff from the Nirmani Akhada, Ayodhya on Tuesday. (Express Photo by Tashi Tobgyal)

The Supreme Court on Tuesday adjourned the hearing in the long-standing Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri mosque title dispute to February 8. A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra also directed the advocates on record of the appeals to sit together and ensure that all the requisite documents are translated, filed and numbered before the apex court Registry.

The bench also took serious note of the submission of senior advocate Kapil Sibal, who is representing Sunni Waqf Board, that the matter be heard only in July 2019, after the completion of the next Lok Sabha polls citing political ramifications.

READ | Highlights of the Supreme Court hearing

Appearing for the Uttar Pradesh government, additional solicitor general Tushar Mehta, on the other hand, vociferously opposed contentions that the pleadings were not complete and asserted that everything has been complied with and the cases were ready for the hearing.

ALSO READ | Babri demolition 25 years later: Cases before Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court

Meanwhile, appellant Muslim parties questioned the reason for hearing the case now and wondered if there was some kind of “hurry”.

On September 30, 2010, the Allahabad High Court had distributed the 2.77 acres of the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi site into three parts, giving each to Nirmohi Akhara sect, the Sunni Central Wakf Board, UP, and Ramlalla Virajman.

However, the order was challenged before the apex court on May 9, 2011, which in its verdict stayed the operation of the decree and ordered status quo of the land and other adjoining areas acquired by the Centre in 1993.

RELATED | Babri demolition 25 years later: How High Court saw answer in split verdict

Earlier in August, the Supreme Court gave the parties 12 weeks to translate all oral evidence and exhibited documents in various languages.

Reacting to Sibal’s stand, BJP chief Amit Shah sought Congress’ clarification on the issue. “Today a surprising stand was taken in SC by Congress leader and Sunni Waqf Board lawyer Kapil Sibal ji, he said hearing should be deferred till after 2019 LS polls. Congress should clear its stand on this,” Shah was quoted as saying by ANI.

“Rahul ji is visiting temples in Gujarat but on the other hand Kapil Sibal is being used to delay Ram janmbhoomi case. Rahul ji should tell us what his view on this is,” he added.

On the eve of the 25th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition, the Centre has directed all states to remain cautious and ensure that there was peace and no incident of communal tension anywhere in the country.

For all the latest India News, download Indian Express App

  1. Saiful Haque
    Dec 7, 2017 at 2:07 pm
    Greatest problem if muslims let it go on Babri masjid , then hindu brigade will declare it another "shaurya diva" to attack muslims.
    1. Saiful Haque
      Dec 7, 2017 at 2:03 pm
      Ayodhya dispute Tell me why any sane person will build a place of worship (masjid) on the ruins of temple when there was so much vacant land available .Why would a muslim make a masjid on the land where idol worship was done for centuries and thus most unsuited for namaz. Muslims are known to scrutinise whether the money to build masjid is from lawful income. Britishers wanted muslims to be embroiled with Hindus so that no challenge to it's rule became real. Britishers were strategically far sighted to understand the game planned to be played over a next century.They taught history written by their historian that would poison hindus mind against muslims. Ayodhya was an after thought by the british. Like in varanasi or Allahabad large numbers of hindus flock for pilgrimage , why almost no hindus came to Ayodhya to worship Ram's birth place whether Ram temple stood or not , if at all it was his place of birth. When hindus can remember Ram after centuries ,why they not continued visit it
      1. Ashish Bedi
        Dec 5, 2017 at 8:33 pm
        Why dont we have the best worship places of all the religions in india created there..i feel as an indian that it isvthe best opportunity for BJP government to show that unity in diversity concept still is practiced in India.
        1. Juturi Sitaramaiah
          Dec 5, 2017 at 9:00 pm
          Why temples of other faiths should be adjacent to famous Hindu temples. See Kasi, Madura etc. will other faiths allow Hindu temples adjacent to their famous places. Hindu temples like Kasi, Madhura, Ayodhya are thousands of years older but Muslim kings encroached on these temples and constructed their own, to insult Hindus. How can you expect Hindus to be broad mind with these encroached faiths. Presen peopleb may not be responsible but they want to enjoy ill deeds of their earlier people, without foregoing.
        2. H
          Dec 5, 2017 at 7:58 pm
          This is how cases pile up. Does no credit to the Judiciary. It is acting like Indian Babudom.
          1. Mahender Goriganti
            Dec 5, 2017 at 7:38 pm
            Yogi government should use 'eminent domain doctrine' to acquire that land, then redistribute in the best interest of the state public at large, making all theses cases for the last 30 years and the SC moot in this issue.
            1. Load More Comments