In its judgment, the Supreme Court has listed out the “net result” of the “evidentiary record”. It has said that accordingly, its relief would have to be “moulded in a manner which preserves the constitutional values of justice, fraternity, human dignity and the equality of religious belief”.
These are the court’s findings, in the words of the judgment:
* The disputed site is one composite whole. There has been no sub-division of the land or any determination of title.
* The Sunni Central Waqf Board has not established its case of a dedication by user.
* The alternate plea of adverse possession has not been established by the Sunni Central Waqf Board.
* 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 existence of the structure of the mosque until 6 December 1992 does not admit any contestation… The evidence indicates that there was no abandonment of the mosque by Muslims. Read | Explained: What to read in ozone hole size
* 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.
* Hindus have established a clear case of a possessory title to the outside courtyard by virtue of long, continued and unimpeded worship at the Ram Chabutra and other objects of religious signficance.
* The Hindus and the Muslims have contested claims to the offering worship within the three domed structure in the inner courtyard. The assertion by the Hindus of their entitlement to offer worship inside has been contested by the Muslims.