New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday took up hearing on the Babri Masjid land dispute case and decided to postpone the hearing until 8 February after Senior Advocates appearing for Sunni Waqf Board requested the Supreme Court to take up the matter after the elections.
The special bench comprising of Justice Justice Deepak Mishra, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazir were hearing the matter when Senior advocates Kapil Sibal, Rajeev Dhawan and Dushyant Dave, representing the Sunni Waqf board questioned the apex court the urgency in hearing the case after the Supreme Court asked the lawyers appearing in the case to complete all the documents related to the case to avoid further delay in the matter.
The special bench will hear total 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court in the four civil suits.
The senior advocates requested the SC to take up the matter on July 15, 2019, only after the general elections are done with.
Senior Advocate Sibal told the special bench that “Ayodhya is a serious matter and there are serious repercussions outside the court when the matter is heard.”
Agreeing with Sibal’s statement, the special bench replied the case is not an ordinary matter, ” But we need to start somewhere.”
While reading the exhibits filed by Defendants in the court, Advocate Sibal reiterated that pleadings in the case are not complete.
He informed the apex court that “All reports of the ASI have not been placed in court. A total number of 19,590 documents were to be filed.”
Addition solicitor general Tushar Mehta, representing Uttar Pradesh in the case rebutted the allegations made by the Waqf lawyers were false and all the related documents had been already put on record along with their translations.
The Allahabad High Court in 2010 had ruled a three-way division of the Ayodhya’s 2.77 acre disputed land among the three parties the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and the Lord Ram Lalla.
Previously Shia Waqf Board member Wasim Rizvi had told that the board had worked out a compromise formula that a mosque could be built in the Muslim- dominated area at a “reasonable distance” from the disputed site in Ayodhya while uilding a temple at the disputed land.
However, the suggestion was intervened and strongly opposed by the All India Sunni Waqf Board who recalled that the order in the disputed case between the two sects was already given in 1946 which declared the mosque belongs to Sunnis.