Ayodhya verdict: All you need to know

Ayodhya verdict: 40 prominent persons file joint review plea

The Supreme Court of India, at New Delhi, the Capital of India. Photo: Rajeev Bhatt , September 19, 2003.

The Supreme Court of India, at New Delhi, the Capital of India. Photo: Rajeev Bhatt , September 19, 2003.   | Photo Credit: Rajeev Bhatt

more-in

Verdict has an impact on secular fabric of country, they say

Forty prominent persons have filed a joint review petition against the Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya appeals in early November, saying the verdict has a direct impact on the secular fabric of the country.

The petitioners, who range from academicians to activists from diverse faiths, have filed the review petition through advocate Prashant Bhushan.

They include Irfan Habib, Harsh Mander, Farah Naqvi, Nandini Sundar, Shabnam Hashmi, John Dayal and Jayati Ghosh among others.

They submitted that though they were not part of the original Ayodhya land title dispute suit, they have found that the judgment’s “tenor, language and operative orders have expanded the scope of the SLP from a title dispute to a battle about the faith of the Hindus and the Muslims”.

The judgment overrides the faith of one community to favour the faith of another.

“Since it is a matter now between communities, the petitioners who belong to diverse faiths within the country are aggrieved by the decision which has a direct impact on the syncretic culture of the country,” the petition said.

“Interestingly, the belief of the Hindus that Ram was born in Ayodhya is not without doubt [as has been expressed by eminent historians such as Professor Romila Thapar and Professor Irfan Habib, mentioned above inter alia]. The existence of the Babri Masjid is a fact that has been historically documented, whereas the existence of the Hindu temple on which this mosque was built is merely a belief of the Hindus, one that has not been corroborated by any of the evidence adduced by the Hindu parties,” the petition said.

The judgment failed to appreciate that neither parties had proved exclusive ownership of the land.

Besides, the judgment effectively rewarded those who broke the law three times over, defied the orders of the Supreme Court and above all dishonoured the guarantees of the Constitution and the central article of faith of the equality of all religions in India’s struggle for freedom, the petitioner argued.

Why you should pay for quality journalism - Click to know more

Related Topics National
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | Jan 22, 2020 11:02:59 PM | https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/ayodhya-verdict-40-prominent-persons-file-joint-review-plea/article30260846.ece

In This Package
You are reading
Ayodhya verdict: 40 prominent persons file joint review plea
Four fresh review pleas filed in Ayodhya case
Sacked from Ayodhya case, says Muslim parties’ lawyer
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind files review plea in Ayodhya case
Ayodhya verdict: Muslim Personal Law Board to file review petition
U.P. Sunni Waqf Board not to file review plea in Ayodhya case
Krishna temple (left) and Shahi Idgah (right) exist side by side. Security camps were added following the demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992.
What does the Places of Worship Act protect?
Ayodhya land exempted in Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act: Supreme Court
File photo of stone carving on pillars, slabs and bricks at Shri Ram Janam Bhumi Trust workshop in Ayodhya
Ayodhya verdict | Can court ask a secular State to construct a temple?
People react after Supreme Court's historic verdict on the Ayodhya land case, in Jaipur, on November 9, 2019.
Ayodhya verdict | Ruins don’t always indicate demolition, observes Supreme Court
Ayodhya verdict | Supreme Court not to entertain claims against actions of Mughals
Ayodhya verdict | Temple at disputed site, alternative land for mosque, rules Supreme Court
Supreme Court's judgment in Ayodhya case: reactions
Ayodhya: How a religious issue became a political hot potato
Ayodhya verdict | Supreme Court agrees Muslims were wronged but allows Ram temple
Ayodhya verdict quashes claim of ‘land as a legal entity’
Ayodhya verdict | Addendum quotes Tulsidas, Ain-i-Akbari for birthplace proof
People react after Supreme Court's historic verdict on the Ayodhya land case, in Jaipur, on November 9, 2019.
Ayodhya verdict | Sunni Waqf Board not to seek review of judgment
Time to celebrate: Residents lit firecrackers in Ayodhya on Saturday after the Supreme Coourt delivered the verdict.
Ayodhya split on predictable lines
Ayodhya verdict | Vindicated by unanimous verdict, says L. K. Advani
Ayodhya verdict | Unimpeded right in outer courtyard wins whole site for Hindus
Ayodhya verdict | Constitution can resolve knotty issues, says Modi
When did the dispute over Ram Janmabhoomi start, and why did it take so long for a resolution?
Highlights of the Ayodhya verdict
Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute: The story so far
Ayodhya title dispute: A quick recap of the final hearings
Ayodhya verdict: decoding Allahabad HC's nine-year-old majority judgment under challenge in SC
Ayodhya verdict: as it happened | Temple at disputed site, alternative land for mosque, says Supreme Court
File photo of stone carving on pillars, slabs and bricks at Shri Ram Janam Bhumi Trust workshop in Ayodhya, for a possible temple at the disputed site.
A chronology of the Ayodhya dispute
What are the Ayodhya appeals all about?
Chronology of Ayodhya case
Timeline: Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute
Next Story