As the Uttar Pradesh government pushed for an early hearing, the Supreme Court on August 11, 2017 scheduled the hearing of 13 appeals in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute on December 5, 2017, the eve of the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the 15th century mosque.
A Special Bench of Justices Dipak Misra, Ashok Bhushan and S. Abdul Nazeer said the contesting parties, including the deity Ram Lalla, U.P. Central Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara, the Uttar Pradesh government and the several legal heirs and representatives of the original parties who died over the years of litigation in various courts, can make their opening statements on December 5, 2017 and continue for two more days in December before the court closes for Christmas vacations.
The court gave the Uttar Pradesh government responsibility to translate the oral evidence in the case within a period of 10 weeks from now. The State government, represented by Additional Solicitor-General Tushar Mehta, visibly displayed eagerness to kick-start the hearing in the Supreme Court. It said it needs just four weeks to translate documentary evidence. Documentary evidence in the case involve scripts, palimpsests and records dating back several centuries and written in various languages ranging from Pali and Sanskrit to Arabic, Persian and Urdu. The case has about 533 documentary exhibits running to over 8,000 pages.
The Uttar Pradesh government insisted that the court hearing begin soon and the parties can, on their own, translate the documents they intend to rely on as and when they require during the hearings. "Every party knows what document they are going to rely. So let's start and the translations can be done as and when a document is relied on during the hearing," Mr. Mehta submitted.
This suggestion was strongly objected to by the Sunni Waqf Board represented by senior advocate Anup Chaudhary and senior advocates Kapil Sibal and Rajeev Dhawan, appearing for some of the opposing parties. Mr. Chaudhary said the "appeals were not yet ripe for hearing". Mr. Sibal and Mr. Dhawan said the documents needed to be translated first and the translations have to be finalised before the hearings start. Mr. Dhawan said otherwise a party can translate a document and "add their own spin to it".
At this point, the court asked the warring parties what they were doing the past seven years the appeals against the September 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement in the title dispute were pending in the Supreme Court. "What were you doing all these years? Why did you not finish translating the documents," Justice Misra asked. The Bench pointed out that these are the same documents which had already been produced before the Allahabad High Court. The court finally ordered the parties to complete translation of the respective documents they would be relying on in the next 10 weeks.
The court said it would first hear the appeals on the original title suits and then subsequently hear a writ petition filed by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy that the right to worship at the Ram mandir in the disputes land is his fundamental right. On March 22, 2016, a Bench led by then Chief Justice of India T.S. Thakur had said that Mr. Swamy's plea to “rebuild” the Ram temple would be sent to the appropriate Bench dealing with the Ramjanmabhoomi title dispute appeals. At that time, the Supreme Court had said that the case would be tagged with the appeals and heard in due course.
The dispute, which has seen much tension and violence over the past decades, has been a subject of intense litigation since the 1950s.
On September 30, 2010, a three-judge Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court held that Hindus have the right to the makeshift temple under the central dome of the Babri Masjid. The High Court ruled in favour of a three-part division of the disputed 2.77 acre area among Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and the Ram Lalla at the disputed site. The Bench had relied on Hindu faith, belief and folklore .
Justice Sudhir Agarwal and Justice D.V. Sharma on the High Court Bench had concluded in their separate judgements that Lord Ram, son of King Dashrath, was born within the 1,482.5 square yards of the disputed Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid premises over 900,000 years ago during the Treta Yuga. Justice Sharma added that the "world knows" where Lord Ram's birthplace is.
The third judge, Justice S.U. Khan , said his finding was an “informed guess” based on “oral evidences of several Hindus and some Muslims” that the precise birthplace of Ram is under the central dome.
