Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 24]

Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 24]

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.

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.

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

  • Rajeev Dhavan continuing his arguments for Sunni Waqf Board.
  • Whole purpose of the entire plaint has been lost sight of, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • Discussion between Justice DY Chandrachud and Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan on implications of plea on behalf of idol and plea claiming the Janmasthan.
  • Time and time again, this suit is filed by them to claim the entire area, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • Dhavan narrating events relating to demolition of the masjid and its consequences.
  • Rajeev Dhavan making submissions to the effect that Janmasthan is not a judirical person.
  • Unfortunately, High Court plunged into the question of Janmasthan. Here too, the appellants have concentrated on that aspect of belief and Janmabhoomi, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • I have never seen an invocation of divine in any SLP, Dhavan says reading out from one of the Hindu parties’ plea.
  • To say that only essentiality of Christianity is Vatican and of Islam is Mecca and Madina is to deny Article 25 to everyone other than Hindus, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • A practice essential to the local people practicing these religions is essential enough, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • The entire appeal makes a distinction between the idol and Ram Janmabhoomi. And the distinctness of Janmabhoomi is evident in pleadings and appeal, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • If its idol, this case could have been resolved much more easily. But if its Janmabhoomi, then it means all hands should be off the place including that of this court. There can be no legal remedy, Rajeev Dhavan.
  • Bench rises for the day.
Bar and Bench - Indian Legal news