2019 Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya dispute

Last updated

2019 Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya dispute
Emblem of the Supreme Court of India.svg
Court Supreme Court of India
Full case nameM Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors
Decided9 November 2019 (2019-11-09)
Citation(s) [1] [2]
Case history
Appealed from High Court of Allahabad
Appealed to Supreme Court of India
Subsequent action(s)See below
Court membership
Judges sitting Ranjan Gogoi (CJI),
Sharad Arvind Bobde,
DY Chandrachud,
Ashok Bhushan,
S. Abdul Nazeer
Case opinions
Decision byJoint opinion of 5 judges [3]

The final judgement in the Ayodhya dispute was declared by the Supreme Court of India on 9 November 2019. [4] The Supreme Court ordered the disputed land (2.77 acres) to be handed over to a trust (to be created by the government of India) to build the Ram Janmabhoomi (revered as the birthplace of Hindu deity, Rama) temple. The court also ordered the government to give an alternative 5 acres of land in another place to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board for the purpose of building a mosque as a replacement for the demolished Babri Masjid.

Contents

Background

Allahabad High Court verdict

 A subsequent land title case was lodged in the Allahabad High Court, the verdict of which was pronounced on 30 September 2010. In the judgment, the three judges of the Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres (1.12 ha) of Ayodhya land be divided into three parts, with 1⁄3 going to the Ram Lalla or Infant Rama represented by the Hindu Mahasabha, 1⁄3 going to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board, and the remaining 1⁄3 going to Nirmohi Akhara. The judgment affirmed that the disputed land was the birthplace of Rama as per evidence provided and that the Babri Masjid was built after the demolition of a Hindu temple, noting that it was not built in accordance with the tenets of Islam. [5]  [6] [ clarification needed ]

Title cases

In 1950, Gopal Singh Visharad filed a title suit with the Allahabad High Court seeking injunction to offer puja (worship) at the disputed site. A similar suit was filed shortly after but later withdrawn by Paramhans Das of Ayodhya. [7] In 1959, the Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu religious institution, [8] filed a third title suit seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site, claiming to be its custodian. A fourth suit was filed by the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board for declaration and possession of the site. The Allahabad High Court bench began hearing the case in 2002, which was completed in 2010. After the Supreme Court of India dismissed a plea to defer the High Court verdict, [9] on 30 September 2010, the High Court of Allahabad, the three-member bench comprising justices S. U. Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D. V. Sharma, ruled that the disputed land be split into three parts. The site of the Ram Lalla idol would go to the party representing Ram Lalla Virajman (the installed Infant Rama deity), Nirmohi Akhara was to receive Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabutara, and the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board to receive the rest. The court also ruled that the status quo should be maintained for three months. [10] [11] All the three parties appealed against the division of disputed land to the Supreme Court. [12] [13]

The Supreme Court held final hearing on the case from 6 August 2019 [14] to 16 October 2019. [15] On 9 November 2019, the Supreme Court ordered the land to be handed over to a trust (to be formed by the Government of India) to build the Hindu temple. It also ordered the government to give 5 acres of land to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board to build a mosque as a replacement for the demolished Babri Masjid. [16]

Restrictions imposed before judgement

For 15 days preceding the verdict, restrictions were imposed in Ayodhya to prevent violence. Security arrangements were increased across India. Thousands of paramilitary forces and police troops were deployed in Ayodhya and surveillance of the region was carried out using CCTV cameras and drones. [17]

Internet services were closed in several places in Uttar Pradesh and Rajasthan, [18] [19] while it was announced that a total of 31 districts and 673 individuals were being closely monitored. [20] Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of India was invoked in the entire state of Uttar Pradesh [21] as well as in some major cities such as Bangalore, [22] Bhopal, [23] Jaipur, [20] Lucknow, and Mumbai. A public holiday was declared for schools and colleges across the states of Jammu and Kashmir, Karnataka, Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh, as well as Delhi, on the day of the verdict. [24] Security was stepped up across various towns in Telangana; 20,000 personnel deployed in Hyderabad, mainly around the communally sensitive areas of the Old City including the Charminar and Mecca Masjid. [25] [26] According to reports, around 40,000 police personnel were deployed in Mumbai [27] and 15,000 in Chennai as a precautionary measure. [28] The prime minister made a public request for maintaining peace and religious harmony. [29]

Summary of the verdict

The five-judge bench of the Supreme Court unanimously pronounced its verdict on 9 November 2019. [30] [31] The judgement can be summarised as follows. [32] [33] [34] [35]

On 12 December 2019 the Supreme Court dismissed all the 18 petitions seeking review of the verdict. [42]

Domestic reactions

Parties to the dispute

The primary lawyer of the Muslim parties Zafaryab Jilani said that they were not satisfied with the verdict but added that the verdict also contained some "good examples". [43] The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board's lawyer, Zafaryab Jilani, "expressed dissatisfaction over the Supreme Court's Ayodhya verdict, saying it has a lot of contradictions and they will seek a review of it." [44] Zufar Faruqi, chairman of the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board, issued a statement saying that he accepted the verdict and declared that it will not submit a review petition for the same. [45]

Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind, a litigant in the dispute, refused to accept the alternative site for a mosque ordered by the court. [46]

All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind decided to file a review petition after rejecting the verdict on 17 November 2019. [47] [48]

Other religious figures

Prominent leaders from the Hindu and the Muslim communities extended their support to the Indian government in maintaining peace, after meeting with National Security Advisor Ajit Doval. [49] The Shahi Imam of the Jama Masjid, Delhi supported the verdict, saying that the dispute should not continue further. [50] Some major industrial bodies supported the decision. [51]

Political parties and figures

Many political parties in India supported the judgement. [52] The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) said the judgement will usher in peace and unity in India. [53] The Indian National Congress supported the verdict and called for calm and peace. [54] Political figures such as Delhi chief minister Arvind Kejriwal, Bihar chief minister Nitish Kumar, Madhya Pradesh chief minister Kamal Nath, and Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam leader M. K. Stalin supported the judgement. [55] [56] The Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi tweeted about the decision saying that it should not be considered as win or loss for anybody. [57] [ better source needed ] In a subsequent address to the nation, he said that there would be peace and unity and that all issues can be solved within the constitutional framework. [58] [59] All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen president Asaduddin Owaisi said that he was not satisfied with the judgement, calling it a victory of "faith over facts". [60]

Other

National Herald, published two articles criticizing the verdict. [61] [62] [63] The editorial later withdrew the articles and issued an apology after facing criticism on social media and from the BJP. [63] [64]

A few celebrities also expressed their opinion in support for the decision and called for harmony and peace. [65]

Concerns of Sikh community

1045-page judgment referring Sikhism as a 'cult' instead of a distinct sovereign religion and quoting accounts of Nihang Sikh worshiping idols which is totally prohibited in Sikhism, was condemned by Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, [66] [67] Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee, [68] H. S. Phoolka [69] and Sikhs. [70] [71] Dr. Manjit Singh Randhawa filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking to expunge 'all distorted facts' in the verdict judgment and word 'cult' while referring to the Sikh religion. [72]

International reactions

The Indian Ministry of External Affairs briefed foreign envoys and diplomats about the verdict on 9 November 2019. [73]

The Minister of Foreign Affairs of Pakistan, Shah Mehmood Qureshi, criticised the verdict and questioned its timing as it coincided with the inauguration of the Kartarpur Corridor. He called the court verdict an indication of the "bigoted ideology of Modi government". [74]

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ayodhya</span> City in Uttar Pradesh, India

Ayodhya is a city situated on the banks of the Sarayu river in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. It is the administrative headquarters of the Ayodhya district as well as the Ayodhya division of Uttar Pradesh, India.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Babri Masjid</span> Destroyed mosque in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, India

Babri Masjid was a mosque in Ayodhya, India. It has been claimed to have been built upon the site of Ram Janmabhoomi, the legendary birthplace of Rama, a principal deity of Hinduism. It has been a focus of dispute between the Hindu and Muslim communities since the 19th century. According to the mosque's inscriptions, it was built in 1528–29 by Mir Baqi, a commander of the Mughal emperor Babur. Before the 1940s, the masjid was officially known as "Masjid-i-Janmasthan". The mosque was attacked and demolished by a Hindu nationalist mob in 1992, which ignited communal violence across the Indian subcontinent.

Ram Janmabhoomi is the site that, according to Hindu religious beliefs, is the birthplace of Rama, the seventh avatar of the Hindu deity Vishnu. The Ramayana states that the location of Rama's birthplace is on the banks of the Sarayu river in a city called "Ayodhya". Modern-day Ayodhya is in the north Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. It is contested whether the Ayodhya mentioned in the Ramayana is the same as the modern city.

The Liberhan Commission was a long-running inquiry commissioned by the Government of India to investigate the destruction of the disputed structure Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in 1992. Led by retired High Court Judge M. S. Liberhan, it was formed on 16 December 1992 by an order of the Indian Home Union Ministry after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on 6 December and the subsequent riots there. The commission was originally mandated to submit its report within three months. Extensions were given 48 times, and after a delay of 17 years, the one-man commission submitted the report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on 30 June 2009. In November 2009, a day after a newspaper published the allegedly leaked contents of the report, the report was tabled in Parliament by the Home Minister P. Chidambaram.

The archaeology of Ayodhya concerns the excavations and findings in the Indian city of Ayodhya in the state of Uttar Pradesh, much of which surrounds the Babri Mosque location.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Kalyan Singh</span> Indian politician (1932–2021)

Kalyan Singh was an Indian politician and a member of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). He served twice as the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh and as a Member of Parliament. He was the Chief minister of Uttar Pradesh during the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992. He is considered an icon of Hindu nationalism, and of the agitation to build a Ram temple in Ayodhya.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ayodhya dispute</span> Political, historical and socio-religious debate in India, centred on land in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh

The Ayodhya dispute is a political, historical, and socio-religious debate in India, centred on a plot of land in the city of Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. The issues revolve around the control of a site regarded since at least the 18th century among many Hindus to be the birthplace of their deity Rama, the history and location of the Babri Masjid mosque at the site, and whether a previous Hindu temple was demolished or modified to create the mosque.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Demolition of the Babri Masjid</span> 1992 religious riot in India

The demolition of the Babri Masjid was carried out on 6 December 1992 by a large group of activists of the Vishva Hindu Parishad and allied organisations. The 16th-century Babri Masjid in the city of Ayodhya, in Uttar Pradesh, India, had been the subject of a lengthy socio-political dispute, and was targeted after a political rally organised by Hindu nationalist organisations turned violent.

Nirmohi Akhara is a Hindu religious denomination. It is one of the fourteen akharas recognized by the Akhil Bharatiya Akhara Parishad and belongs to the Vaishnav Bairagi Sampradaya.

Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas is an organisation which was formed as a trust to promote and oversee the construction of a temple in Ayodhya, India at the Ram Janmabhoomi, the reputed site of the birth of the Hindu deity Rama. The Nyas was formed by members of the Vishva Hindu Parishad.

<i>Ram Rath Yatra</i> 1990 political–religious rally in India

The Ram Rath Yatra was a political and religious rally that lasted from September to October 1990. It was organised by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its Hindu nationalist affiliates, and led by the then-president of the BJP, L. K. Advani. The purpose of the yatra was to support the agitation, led by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and its affiliates in the Sangh Parivar, to erect a temple to the Hindu deity Rama on the site of the Babri Masjid.

Dhaneshwar Mandal is a retired Professor in Ancient History, Culture and Archaeology at Allahabad University. He is widely known for his strong position against the excavations at the Babri Masjid site in Ayodhya conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ayodhya firing incident</span> Police firing in Ayodhya

The Ayodhya firing describes the occasion when the Uttar Pradesh police opened fire at civilians because they were heading to demolish the Babri Masjid on two separate days, 30 October 1990 and 2 November 1990, in the aftermath of the Ram Rath Yatra. The civilians were religious volunteers, or kar sevaks, assembled near the Ram Janmabhoomi site at Ayodhya. The state government's official records report that at least 17 people were killed.

<i>Ram Ki Janmabhoomi</i> Hindi-language Indian film

Ram Ki Janmabhoomi is a 2019 Indian Hindi-language drama film directed by Sanoj Mishra. The film is produced and written by Jitendra Narayan Singh and stars Manoj Joshi and Govind Namdev. The movie deals with the controversial issue of Ram Mandir. The film was theatrically released on 29 March 2019. It is produced by Jitendra Narayan Singh Tyagi.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Shri Ram Janmbhoomi Teerth Kshetra</span> Trust for a Hindu temple in Ayodhya, India

Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra is a trust set up for the construction and management of Ram Mandir in Ayodhya by the Government of India in February 2020. The trust is composed of 15 trustees.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Ram Mandir</span> Temple of the Hindu deity Rama in Ayodhya, India

The Ram Mandir is a partially constructed Hindu temple complex in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, India. Many Hindus believe that it is located at the site of Ram Janmabhoomi, the mythical birthplace of Rama, a principal deity of Hinduism. The temple was inaugurated on 22 January 2024 after a prana pratishtha (consecration) ceremony. On the first day of its opening, following the consecration, the temple received a rush of over half a million visitors, and after a month, the average number of visitors was reported to be "1 to 1.5 lakh on a daily basis".

Dhannipur is a village in Ayodhya district of Uttar Pradesh, India. In February 2020, the government allotted 5 acres (2.0 ha) of agricultural land at Dhannipur in Ayodhya municipal corporation to the Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board as an alternative site for constructing a mosque, to replace the Babri Masjid that was demolished in 1992. The Babri Masjid, after being re-built is now known as the Mohammed Bin Abdullah Masjid.

Baba Lal Das was first ever Mahant of the idols of the deity Rama placed within the Babri Masjid complex in Ayodhya. He was appointed to his position by the Lucknow High Court in 1981. Lal Das was a fierce critic of Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS), Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) Vishva Hindu Parishad and Bajrang Dal, and he criticized these groups in the 1992 documentary Ram ke Naam.

The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Waqf Board is a body constituted under The Wakf Act, 1995 of the Government of India, for general superintendence of the affairs of Sunni Muslim waqf (charity) properties, waqf institutions of the Sunni Muslim community of the state of Uttar Pradesh in India. Its chairman is Zufar Ahmad Faruqi. The Sunni Waqf Board has been the main Muslim litigant in the Babri Masjid–Ram Janmabhoomi title dispute.

Muhammad Bin Abdullah Masjid or Ayodhya Mosque is being constructed in Dhannipur, Ayodhya district, Uttar Pradesh, at the Supreme Court of India designated site following the verdict related to the Ayodhya dispute case.

References

  1. ↑ "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  2. ↑ "Meet the five judges who delivered the Ayodhya verdict". The Economic Times. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 17 February 2020. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  3. ↑ "Who wrote Ayodhya verdict?". Archived from the original on 23 October 2022. Retrieved 23 October 2022.
  4. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict live updates: Supreme Court delivers judgement on Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid case". The Times of India. Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  5. ↑ "Ayodhya dispute: The complex legal history of India's holy site". BBC News. 16 October 2019. Archived from the original on 17 October 2019. Retrieved 16 October 2019.
  6. ↑ Gist of Judgements Archived 17 August 2019 at the Wayback Machine by Justices S. U. Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and Dharam Veer Sharma, Allahabad High Court, 6 October 2010
  7. ↑ Das, Anil (28 September 2010). "Chronolgy of Ayodhya's Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit issue". International Business Times. Archived from the original on 1 October 2010.
  8. ↑ Muralidharan, Sukumar (12 April 2002). "Temple Interrupted". Frontline. Archived from the original on 30 September 2010.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: unfit URL (link)
  9. ↑ "Time-line of Ayodhya dispute and slew of legal suits". DNA India. 28 September 2010. Archived from the original on 2 October 2010.Venkatesan, J. (28 September 2010). "Ayodhya verdict tomorrow". The Hindu. Chennai, India. Archived from the original on 1 October 2010.
  10. ↑ "India holy site 'split between Hindus and Muslims'". BBC News. 30 September 2010. Archived from the original on 1 October 2010.
  11. ↑ S. U. Khan; S. Agarwal; D. V. Sharma. "Decision of the hon'ble special full bench hearing Ayodhya matters". Archived from the original on 27 August 2014.
  12. ↑ "Court orders 3-way division of disputed Ayodhya land". The Hindu. Chennai, India. 30 September 2010. Archived from the original on 3 October 2010.
  13. ↑ "Ayodhya Dispute Case Background". Supreme Court Observer. Archived from the original on 6 January 2018.
  14. ↑ "Ayodhya dispute: Supreme Court to commence day-to-day hearing today". India Today. Press Trust of India. 6 August 2019. Archived from the original on 25 August 2019. Retrieved 25 August 2019.
  15. ↑ "Supreme Court hearing ends in Ayodhya dispute; orders reserved". The Hindu Business Line. Press Trust of India. 16 October 2019. Archived from the original on 23 October 2019. Retrieved 18 October 2019.
  16. ↑ "Ram Mandir verdict: Supreme Court verdict on Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case". The Times of India. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  17. ↑ "Ayodhya turned into a fortress ahead of Supreme Court Verdict". Asian News International . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  18. ↑ "Ahead of Ayodhya verdict, internet shuts down in Uttar Pradesh cities". The Times of India . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 27 December 2019.
  19. ↑ "In Jaipur, Internet Suspension Extended till Monday over Ayodhya Verdict". Archived from the original on 15 November 2019. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  20. 1 2 "Ayodhya Verdict: Internet Services Shutdown in Agra, Aligarh; 29 Districts Monitored". News18. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  21. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict: Section 144 imposed across UP, all educational institutions ordered shut till Nov 11". DNA India. 8 November 2019. Archived from the original on 19 November 2019. Retrieved 18 November 2019.
  22. ↑ "Prohibitory orders in Bengaluru; holiday for schools, colleges across Karnataka on Saturday". The Hindu. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  23. ↑ Kritika Bansal (3 November 2019). "Section 144 imposed in Bhopal ahead of Ayodhya verdict – India News". Indiatoday.in. Archived from the original on 5 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  24. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict: Schools, colleges shut in UP, MP, K'taka, J-K, Delhi; Sec 144 imposed – india news". Hindustan Times. 21 October 2019. Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  25. ↑ AuthorTelanganaToday. "Ayodhya verdict: Heavy security deployed in Hyderabad". Telangana Today. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  26. ↑ Deshpande, Abhinay (10 November 2019). "Just another day in Hyderabad". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  27. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict: Section 144 imposed in Mumbai, 40,000 police personnel deployed". The New Indian Express. Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  28. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict: Security tightened in Chennai, 15,000 police personnel deployed". Dnaindia.com. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  29. ↑ Desk, SAE News (9 November 2019). "PM calls for peace and harmony on Ayodhya verdict". The South Asian Express. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 14 November 2019.
  30. ↑ Desk, The Hindu Net (9 November 2019). "Ayodhya verdict: as it happened | Temple at disputed site, alternative land for mosque, says Supreme Court". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X. Archived from the original on 11 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  31. ↑ "Indian top court gives Ayodhya holy site to Hindus". British Broadcasting Corporation . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  32. ↑ "Supreme Court's verdict on Ayodhya land dispute: 10 Key takeaways". The Times of India . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  33. ↑ The Hindu Net Desk (9 November 2019). "Highlights of the Ayodhya verdict". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X. Archived from the original on 20 December 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  34. ↑ "Damage, desecration & demolition of Babri Masjid illegal acts, says SC". The Times of India . 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  35. ↑ "Hindus made a better case, Waqf Board couldn't prove exclusive possession of Ayodhya site: SC". The Times of India . 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  36. ↑ "Ayodhya dispute: Muslim parties in SC retract statement on Ram Chabutra - India News". Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
  37. ↑ "Ayodhya case: SC says ASI report not an ordinary opinion; inferences drawn by cultivated minds - The Economic Times". The Economic Times. Archived from the original on 31 October 2021. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
  38. ↑ Mahapatra, Dhananjay (18 September 2019). "Historians' report on Babri mosque mere 'opinion': SC". The Times of India . Archived from the original on 29 June 2020. Retrieved 8 August 2020.
  39. ↑ Rajagopal, Krishnadas (10 November 2019). "Ayodhya verdict | Ruins don't always indicate demolition, observes Supreme Court". The Hindu. Archived from the original on 12 November 2019. Retrieved 12 November 2019.
  40. ↑ Garg, Abhinav (11 November 2019). "How Guru Nanak played a 'role' in Ayodhya verdict". The Times of India . Archived from the original on 11 November 2019.
  41. ↑ "No regret over SC saying Nirmohi Akhara not 'shebait' of deity Ram Lalla: Outfit". The Times of India. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  42. ↑ "Supreme Court Dismisses All Petitions Seeking Review Of Its Ayodhya Verdict". NDTV. 12 December 2019. Archived from the original on 12 December 2019. Retrieved 12 December 2019.
  43. ↑ Pokharel, Bill Spindle and Krishna (9 November 2019). "India's Top Court Rules in Favor of Hindus in a Long Feud With Muslims Over Religious Site". The Wall Street Journal . Archived from the original on 10 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  44. ↑ "Lots Of Contradictions, Will Seek Review: Sunni Waqf Board Lawyer On Ayodhya Verdict". Outlook (Indian magazine) . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 29 August 2020.
  45. ↑ "Humbly accept Ayodhya verdict, won't file any review petition: UP Sunni Central Waqf Board". The Times of India . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  46. ↑ "No alternative land acceptable for mosque in Ayodhya: Jamiat Ulama-e-Hind". Hindustan Times. 15 November 2019. Archived from the original on 15 November 2019. Retrieved 15 November 2019.
  47. ↑ Rashid, Omar (17 November 2019). "Ayodhya verdict: Muslim Personal Law Board to file review petition against Supreme Court's decision". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X. Archived from the original on 19 December 2019. Retrieved 17 November 2019.
  48. ↑ "AIMPLB to seek review of SC verdict in Ayodhya case, against taking alternative 5-acre plot". Press Trust of India . 17 November 2019. Archived from the original on 18 November 2019. Retrieved 17 November 2019– via The Times of India.
  49. ↑ "NSA Ajit Doval meets Hindu, Muslim religious leaders post Ayodhya verdict". The Economic Times. 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 26 March 2020. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  50. ↑ "Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya: Jama Masjid Shahi Imam says matter shouldn't be stretched further". The Economic Times. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 18 February 2020. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  51. ↑ "India Inc hails Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya Ram temple". The Times of India . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 January 2020. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  52. ↑ Varma, Gyan (9 November 2019). "Ayodhya Verdict: Political Fallout". Mint . Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  53. ↑ "BJP hails Ayodhya verdict; says it will set the tone for peace and unity". The Hindu Business Line . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  54. ↑ "Congress welcomes Ayodhya verdict, appeals for peace". Press Trust of India . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019– via India Today.
  55. ↑ "Ayodhya Verdict: Politicians Appeal For Peace After Big Judgement". NDTV . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  56. ↑ "SC Ayodhya verdict should be looked at without disagreement: MK Stalin". Asian News International . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  57. ↑ "Narendra Modi (@narendramodi) | Twitter". twitter.com. Archived from the original on 8 March 2021. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  58. ↑ Abi-Habib, Maria; Yasir, Sameer (8 November 2019). "Court Backs Hindus on Ayodhya, Handing Modi Victory in His Bid to Remake India". The New York Times. ISSN   0362-4331. Archived from the original on 11 November 2019. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  59. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict | Constitution can resolve knotty issues, says Modi". The Hindu. 9 November 2019. ISSN   0971-751X. Archived from the original on 18 January 2020. Retrieved 10 November 2019.
  60. ↑ Mohammed, Syed (9 November 2019). "Supreme Court is supreme, not infallible: Owaisi". The Hindu. ISSN   0971-751X. Archived from the original on 11 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  61. ↑ "Congress faces flak for National Herald article on Ayodhya judgement". The New Indian Express. 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 12 November 2019. Retrieved 17 November 2019.
  62. ↑ "Managed by Cong Leaders, Newspaper Compares Ayodhya Ruling to 'Actions of Pak SC'; Draws BJP's Ire". Press Trust of India . 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 11 November 2019. Retrieved 17 November 2019– via News18.
  63. 1 2 "National Herald takes down controversial Ayodhya opinion after Congress faces backlash". The Print. 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 17 November 2019. Retrieved 17 November 2019.
  64. ↑ "BJP slams Congress over National Herald article on Ayodhya verdict". The Times of India . 10 November 2019. Archived from the original on 11 November 2019. Retrieved 17 November 2019.
  65. ↑ "Ayodhya verdict: Rajinikanth, Taapsee Pannu, Kangana Ranaut and others react". The Indian Express. 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  66. ↑ Brar, Kamaldeep Singh (28 November 2019). "SGPC House condemns references to Sikh Guru in Ayodhya verdict". The Indian Express. Archived from the original on 1 August 2020. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  67. ↑ Singh, Surjit (28 November 2019). "SGPC condemns Ayodhya verdict". Hindustan Times. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  68. ↑ "'Sikh cult' in Ayodhya judgement: DSGMC forms panel". The Times of India. 16 November 2019. Archived from the original on 26 October 2021. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  69. ↑ "Phoolka objects to term 'Sikh cult' in Ayodhya verdict addendum". Hindustan Times. 14 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  70. ↑ "Why Sikhs Are Angry With the Ayodhya Judgment". The Wire. 13 November 2019. Archived from the original on 15 August 2020. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  71. ↑ "How a Third Dimension was Introduced to the Ayodhya Judgment". The Wire. 20 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  72. ↑ "Petition in SC against term 'Sikh cult' in Ayodhya verdict". The Tribune. 24 January 2020. Archived from the original on 13 September 2020. Retrieved 1 August 2020.
  73. ↑ "MEA briefs diplomats of various countries on SC's Ayodhya verdict". The Times of India . 9 November 2019. Archived from the original on 13 January 2020. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
  74. ↑ "After 370, Foreign Minister of Islamic Republic of Pakistan whines about Ayodhya verdict". The Free Press Journal . Archived from the original on 9 November 2019. Retrieved 9 November 2019.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.