Supreme Court hearing on Ayodhya God Ram temple till January 10
A hearing in the Supreme Court on the construction of the Ram temple in Ayodhya will now be heard on January 10. The Supreme Court can constitute a Bench on January 10 for hearing the case. According to our colleague Suchitra Mohanty, who is present in the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi said, “On January 10, the further order, in this case, will give an appropriate bench.” In this case, 14 appeals have been filed in the Supreme Court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict. The Allahabad High Court had decided to distribute 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya between the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lala. Earlier, in the Supreme Court, the hearing was held on October 29 and the hearing will be held at Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice S. K. Kaul and Justice The bench of three judges of M. Joseph did it. Then the Supreme Court had said.
When did that happen?
The Ayodhya dispute has become a political issue in India. The workers of many Hindu organizations had demolished Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992. Many Hindu organizations, including the Bharatiya Janata Party and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, claim that the birth of Lord Rama of Hindus was exactly where Babri Masjid was. They claim that the Babri Masjid was actually constructed by breaking a temple. After the demolition of Babri Masjid, riots in the country and demand for transfer of disputed land for construction of a temple in the Supreme Court were raised with the loud noise. This matter of the ownership of the disputed land has been going on in the courts of the country since 1949. We tell you when the whole case started and how far is the wheel of time in this dispute.
1528: A mosque was constructed at a place in Ayodhya, which some Hindus consider to be the birthplace of Lord Rama.
1853: For the first time, this site has communal riots. It is believed that Mughal emperor Babar had built this mosque, which is why it was known as the Babri Masjid. Now some Hindu organizations want to build a Ram temple at that place.
1859: British rulers a fence at the disputed site and allow Hindus to pray to Muslims in the inner part of the complex and to Hindus.
1949: Idols of Lord Rama were found in the mosque. Some Hindus allegedly reportedly kept these sculptures there. Muslims protested on this and the two sides filed a lawsuit in the court. The government has declared this site as disputed and locked it here.
1984: Some Hindus formed a committee to “liberate” the place of Lord Rama and construct Ram temple there under the leadership of Vishwa Hindu Parishad. Later, this campaign was led by the leader of Bharatiya Janata Party LK Advani.
1986: District Magistrate ordered the Hindus to open a lock on the door of the disputed mosque. The Muslims formed the Babri Masjid Sangharsh Committee against this.
1989: Vishwa Hindu Parishad expands the campaign for Ram temple construction and laid the foundation of Ram Temple near the disputed site.
1990: Workers of Vishwa Hindu Parishad carried some damage to the Babri Masjid. The then Prime Minister Chandrasekhar tried to resolve the dispute through talks but did not get success.
1992: Vishwa Hindu Parishad, Shiv Sena, and Bharatiya Janata Party activists dropped the Babri Masjid on 6th December. After this, communal riots broke out between Hindus and Muslims across the country. More than 2000 deaths have been reported in these riots.
1998: Bharatiya Janata Party under the leadership of Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee formed the coalition government.
2001: Tensions have increased on the anniversary of the demolition of the Babri Masjid and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad repeated its resolve to construct a Ram Temple at the disputed site.
January 2002: Prime Minister Vajpayee set up Ayodhya committee to resolve the Ayodhya dispute. Senior officer Shatrughan Singh was appointed to interact with Hindu and Muslim leaders.
February 2002: BJP refuses to include an issue of construction of Ram temple in its manifesto for Uttar Pradesh assembly elections. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad announced the construction of Ram temple construction work from March 15. Hundreds of Hindu workers engaged in Ayodhya. 58 workers were killed in an attack in Godhra, Gujarat, on which the Hindu workers returning from Ayodhya were traveling in the train.
March 13, 2002: The Supreme Court has said in its decision that the status quo will be kept in Ayodhya and no one will be allowed permission of Shilapujan on land acquired by the government. The central government said that the court verdict will be followed.
March 15, 2002: There was an agreement between the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and the Central Government that the leaders of the council will hand over the government to the slabs outside the temple premises. Under the leadership of Mahant Paramahansa Ramchandra Das, president of Ramjanmabhoomi Nyas and Ashok Singhal, the executive president of the VHP, about eight hundred workers handed over a stone to the government officials in the arena.
June 22, 2002: Vishwa Hindu Parishad raised demand for transfer of disputed land for temple construction
January 2003: Through radio waves, it was tried to ascertain whether there was no definitive conclusion of the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid campus under the ruins of an ancient building.
March 2003: The Central Government requested the Supreme Court to grant permission to worship at the disputed site which was turned down.
April 2003: Archaeological Survey Department started the excavation of the disputed site on the direction of Allahabad High Court. After the excavation in June, the report said that there are similar residuals found in the temple.
May 2003: CBI filed supplementary charge sheet against eight people, including Deputy Prime Minister LK Advani, in 1992 for the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya.
June 2003: Shankaracharya of Kanchi Peetha Jayendra Saraswati mediated to resolve the matter and hoped that by July, the solution of the Ayodhya issue will definitely be taken away, but nothing like this will happen.
August 2003: BJP leader and Deputy Prime Minister LK Advani rejected the VHP’s request to bring a special bill to build a Ram temple.
April 2004: Advani worshiped in a temporary Ram Mandir in Ayodhya and said that the construction of the temple will definitely be done.
July 2004: Shiv Sena chief Bal Thackeray suggested that any National Memorial be made in the name of Mangal Pandey at the disputed site in Ayodhya.
January 2005: LK Advani was summoned in the court of Ayodhya on December 6, 1992, in connection with his alleged role in the Babri Masjid demolition.
July 2005: Five armed extremists attacked the disputed campus, killing six people, including five extremists, the assailants were killed near the outer security circle.
July 6, 2005: Allahabad High Court orders LK Advani to be included in the case of ‘inflammatory speech’ during the demolition of Babri Masjid. Earlier, he was acquitted.
July 28, 2005: LK Advani appeared in a Babri Masjid demolition case in 1992 in a court in Rae Bareli. The court fixed the charges against LK Advani.
August 4, 2005: The Faizabad court sent four people involved in judicial custody in the attack near the disputed area of Ayodhya.
April 20, 2006: The Congress-led UPA government has written in a written statement before the Liberhan Commission that the demolition of the Babri Masjid was part of a planned conspiracy and there was “collusion” of BJP, National Self-Service Federation, Bajrang Dal, and Shiv Sena.
July 2006: The Government proposes to make a bulletproof glass cover for the security of a temporary Ram temple at Ayodhya disputed site. The proposal was opposed by the Muslim community and said that it was against the order of the court in which instructions were given to maintain the status quo.
March 19, 2007: Congress MP Rahul Gandhi said during the election tour that if a member of the Nehru-Gandhi family was the Prime Minister then the Babri Masjid would not have fallen. There was a sharp reaction to his statement.
30 June 2009: Liberhan Commission constituted to investigate the demolition of the Babri Masjid has submitted its report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh after 17 years.
July 7, 2009: Uttar Pradesh government accepted an affidavit that 23 important files related to the Ayodhya dispute have disappeared from the Secretariat.
November 24, 2009: Report of the Liberhan Commission presented in both the Houses of Parliament. The Commission blamed Atal Bihari Vajpayee and the media and gave a clean chit to Narasimha Rao.
May 20, 2010: In the case of the Babri demolition case, the petition filed in the high court against LK Advani and other leaders for criminal prosecution was dismissed in the High Court.
July 26, 2010: The hearing on the Ramjanmabhoomi and the Babri Masjid dispute.
September 8, 2010: The court announces the verdict on the Ayodhya dispute on September 24.
September 17, 2010: The High Court dismisses the decision to quash the decision.
30 September 2010: In a historic decision, the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court declared the disputed site of Ayodhya as Ram Janmabhoomi and divided it into three parts.
May 9, 2011: The Supreme Court banning Allahabad High Court Judgments said that during the hearing, the High Court’s decision will have stayed on implementation. Also, the status quo will be restored on January 7, 1993, at the disputed site.
26 February 2016: Subramaniam Swamy filed a petition in the Supreme Court about the construction of Ram Temple on the disputed land.
July 20, 2016: Babri Masjid- The oldest criminal of the Ramjanmabhoomi (plaintiff) Hashim Ansari died at Ayodhya at the age of 96.
21 March 2017: Supreme Court Chief Justice JS Khehar said that the Ayodhya dispute case should be sorted out by mutual negotiation. He said that he can mediate dialogue, many of his BJP leaders including LK Advani were welcomed by this suggestion.
07 August 2017: The Supreme Court constituted the Bench of three judges to hear the petition challenging the Allahabad High Court’s Ismail Farooqui verdict in 1994.
08 August 2017: UP Shi’a Central Waqf Board told the Supreme Court that a mosque can be made in a Muslim-dominated area at a distance from the disputed land in Ayodhya.
September 11, 2017: Supreme Court directing Allahabad High Court, that for the monitoring of Ram Janmabhoomi in Ayodhya, two judges should be appointed as a supervisor within 10 days.
20 November 2017: UP Shiya Central Waqf Board told the Supreme Court that the temple can be built in Ayodhya and the mosque can be made in Lucknow.
01 December 2017: 32 workers gave intervention applications to challenge Allahabad High Court’s 2010 decision. It included the applications of Subramaniam Swamy, including filmmakers Aparna Sen, Shyam Benegal, and human rights activist Teesta Setalvad.
08 February 2018: In the Supreme Court, hearing of the case of the Diwali started.
March 14, 2018: Supreme Court dismisses all interim petitions, including Subramaniam Swamy. Regarding the petition of Subramaniam Swamy only, the court said that it will now be listed as a separate petition.
06 April 2018: On behalf of the Muslim party, senior advocate Rajiv Dhawan filed a petition in the Supreme Court and said that he sent this matter to the big bench for reconsideration of his decision in 1994.
06 July 2018: Uttar Pradesh government told the Supreme Court that some Muslim organizations are trying to delay the hearing of the matter by seeking reconsideration in the 1994 judgment.
13 July 2018: The Supreme Court has clarified that in Ayodhya disputed land, continuous hearing will be held from July 20.
July 20, 2018: Supreme Court reserves the defense.
September 27, 2018: Supreme Court refuses to reconsider the 1994 Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid decision. In that decision, the Supreme Court had said that reading ‘Namaz in the mosque is not an integral part of Islam’. In addition, the Supreme Court also refused to send Ismail Faruki case to the Constitutional Bench.
l am Rananjay Parmar and l work with Credence Research Limited is a marketing consulting and research Agency that is focused on the United States market and the United Kingdom. We are specialized in primary data collection and offer our clients relevant information and advice through the help of adequate research analysis and conclusions.