Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news
Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 10]

Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 10]

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.

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

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

  • Hearing continues into day 10. Senior Counsel Ranjit Kumar arguing today on behalf of plaintiff in suit no. 1, Gopal Singh.
  • Ranjit Kumar relying on certain exhibits which had been produced by him in trial court in Section 145 CrPC proceeding.
  • Ranjit Kumar placing reliance on am affidavit filed by one Abdul Gani as per which Mosque was erected by demolishing Ram temple but in spite of erection of said mosque the Hindus did not give up possession and were all along worshipping idol there.
  • Ranjit Kumar placing reliance on more such affidavits by Muslims in Section 145 proceedings.
  • Bench asking him whether those Muslim persons were cross examined to determine the veracity of contents of affidavits.
  • Ranjit Kumar admits they were not cross examined but those persons had come forward and made these statement, so an inference can be drawn. “I am not saying what they said should be taken as gospel truth. But nobody has objected to what they have said.”
  • The persons who have made the statement have been verified. An inference can be drawn based on what they have said in the absence of any objection, submits Ranjit Kumar.
  • How did these affidavits form part of the record before High Court? asks Ranjit Kumar. They were filed in the suit which then got transferred to High Court, replies Ranjit Kumar.

Post Lunch Session

  • Bench assembles, Ranjit Kumar resumes his arguments.
  • Ranjit Kumar citing judgments to explain the scope of the concept of ‘Hindu’.
  • Idol worship or rituals or ceremonies may not be practised by all persons though they may be professing Hindu religion, Ranjit Kumar reading out excerpts of judgments dealing with the scope of Hindu and Hinduism.
  • My right to worship is an unfettered right which arise due to centuries of worship that has been happening at the site, Ranjit Kumar concludes his submissions.
  • Senior Advocate VN Sinha resumes, reiterates that the disputed land had become part of British crown on annexation by British. Unless the land was leased out, the land was vested with the British crown.
  • Senior Advocate Sushil Kumar Jain now begins his second round of arguments. He had not completed his arguments earlier.
  • Sushil Kumat Jain reiterates on behalf of Nirmohi Akhara that it had Shebaitship.
  • Suit no. 4 by Muslim parties is barred by limitation since the limitation ran from 1934 and not 1949 as claimed, Sushil Kumar Jain.
  • Discussion now on Nirmohi Akhara’s stance on whether they are claiming title or not. Is there a contradiction in the stance taken by them earlier in HC and now? CJI Gogoi asks Sushil Kumar Jain to respond on the same.
  • Bench rises for the day. Hearing to contimue tomorrow.