Indian Supreme Court stays ‘strange’ Babri verdict

Criticises the high court decree to divide the disputed site into three parts.

Aditi Phadnis May 10, 2011


The Indian Supreme Court (SC) has stayed the Allahabad High Court’s judgment in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, calling it a “strange” verdict.

Although there was complete calm on the ground in Faizabad where Ayodhya is located, the SC’s intervention raised questions about the reasoning for the high court judgment – whether it was law or faith.

A SC bench, comprising Justice Aftab Alam and Justice RM Lodha, was hearing the case on Monday. It described the September 2010 judgment of the high court as “strange”, especially the three-part division of the disputed site. Justice Lodha observed that no party had asked for such a partition and the court had done it on its own.

A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a lengthy judgment that ran into more than 5,000 pages, had directed that the 2.77-acre land on which the structure had once stood be partitioned into three parts among Muslims, Hindus and the Nirmohi Akhara. In its judgment, the high court referred to 274 books and cited 800 judgments.

During the half-hour hearing in a crowded courtroom, the judges remarked that “a new dimension was given by the high court as the decree of partition was not sought by the parties. It was not prayed by anyone. It (the high court judgment) has to be stayed. It is a strange order,” the bench said.

The court clarified that there shall be no religious activity on the 67-acre land acquired by the central government following the 16th century structure’s demolition by Hindu devotees. The present order substantially continues the orders that the SC had passed in 1993 and 2002, awaiting the judgment of the high court regarding the site’s ownership.

“It is a difficult situation now, the position is that it (the high court judgment) has created a litany of litigation,” the bench observed.

The bench was hearing a batch of appeals filed by the Nirmohi Akhara, Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha, Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind, Sunni Central Wakf Board and others. The wakf board and Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind want the entire high court judgment to be set aside. According to them, the high court relied on faith rather than evidence.

Published in The Express Tribune, May 10th, 2011.


Most Read


Nobody | 10 years ago | Reply @ameer: More secular than American? Please, give me some of what you're smoking.
Suresh | 10 years ago | Reply If Indian Muslims can go to court and fight a battle for their religious possession fearlessly, without prejudices, that alone the strength of Indian state. There are bad guys on the street do all sorts of wrong things which they should never do, but a secular constitution and independent judiciary are all that matters. In this case however, the issue is who holds the title for the land. Unfortunately, neither Hindus nor Muslims. Both have their own version of long possession. A tricky situation for a secular state which respects all the religion, and considers they are all same. It can not even say, let the state acquire it and ask all the 3 parties to vacate the disputed land.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ