Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 33]
News

Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 33]

Bar & Bench

The hearing in the Ayodhya case is progressing at the Supreme Court of India.

The Ayodhya case is being heard by a Constitution Bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer.

Hearings had commenced on August 6, with arguments being made on behalf of the Nirmohi Akhara. In the following hearings, submissions were also made on behalf of the deity Ram Lalla and the Ram Janmabhoomi Punaruddhar Samiti. After arguments on behalf of the Hindu parties to the Ayodhya dispute concluded, arguments have commenced on behalf of the Muslim parties to the case.

The hearing today will only be till 1 pm.

Below are live updates from today’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:

  • Hearing continues, Senior Counsel Meenakshi Arora resumes her arguments.
  • The ASI report while being an evidence of an expert under Section 45 of Evidence Act, is merely an opinion, Meenakshi Arora.
  • Justice Agarwal acknowledges this in his judgment, Arora.
  • ASI report is hypothetical and based on inferences since the science of archeology is based on inferences by archeologists with subjectivity creeping into conclusions, Meenakshi Arora.
  • Archeology as a science is more like a handwriting expert’s opinion. It can be considered but only with additonal evidence to support it, Meenakshi Arora.
  • The only thing we have to see is whether inferences drawn by archeologists are valid or not, Justice SA Bobde.
  • I would sum it up like this: ASI archeologists have one inference, their witnesses have another inference and our witnesses have other inferences. So there are a lot of assumptions and presumptions, Meenkashi Arora.
  • As per various High Court judgments, it is not necessary to examine the commissioner to rebut his report. Parties can bring independent witnesses to counter commissioner’s opinion, Meenakshi Arora.
  • ASI report does not answer the query that was posed by the court which was whether there was a Ram Janmasthan temple or not, Meenakshi Arora. There was no definitve conclusion that could be drawn by ASI, Meenakshi Arora concludes her submissions.
  • Senior Counsel Shekhar Naphade commences submissions on the aspect of Res Judicata on behalf of Muslim parties.
  • Ultimately, it boils down to whether that suit was for the benefit of Hindus or not? Shekhar Naphade.
  • Naphade citing conflicts within Jain community with the dipsute even going to Privy Council. Testing the bonafides of parties is essential when allowing persons to sue or defend on behalf of persons having same interest, Naphade.
  • Bench rises.

Read an account of Day 1 of the arguments here. Accounts of the arguments made on Days 2 and 3 can be read here and here. Arguments made on Day 5 can be read here.

Day 6 arguments can be read here and Day 7 arguments can be read here. Day 8 arguments can be read here. Day 9 arguments can be read here. Day 10 arguments can be read here.

An account of day 15 arguments can be read here and an account of day 16 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 17 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 21 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 22 arguments may be read here. Day 24 arguments can be read here. Day 25 arguments may be read here. An account of the arguments that took place on Days 26 and 27 may be read here. Read an account of Day 29 here. An account of Day 30 can be read here. and and account of Day 31 may be read here. An account of Day 32 arguments can be read here.

Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
www.barandbench.com