Today, the Supreme Court will announce a major decision on a matter related to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute. Ram Janmabhoomi - The Babri Masjid is likely to pronounce its verdict on the Supreme Court's plea today on the plea of a Muslim group seeking a rethink on the Supreme Court's 1994 decision on the ownership of the Babri Masjid. The Supreme Court will decide whether the decision of the Constitution Bench of 1994 needs to be reconsidered or not? In fact, in the 1994 judgment, it was said that Namaz is not an integral part of Islam in the mosque.
If the bench of the three judges decides that the matter should be reconsidered, then it can send the Constitution bench of five judges. This will delay the hearing of the title suit. On the other hand, if the bench says that there is no need to consider that decision, then the hearing on the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute can be soon.
On July 20, the Supreme Court reserved the judgment on whether or not there needs to be considered again on the 1994 judgment of Constitution Bench.
Actually, before the Supreme Court Title Suit, now he was hearing on this aspect that whether prayer is an integral part of Islam in the mosque. It was decided before the court that it will be decided that the decision of the Constitution bench of 1994 needs to be re-considered or not that reading Namaz in the mosque is not an integral part of Islam. After this the title suit will be considered.
In fact, in 1994, the bench of five judges had instructed to maintain status quo in the Ram Janmabhoomi so that Hindu worship can be done. The bench also said that reading Namaz in the mosque is not an integral part of Islam. In 2010, the Allahabad High Court gave a third Hindus, one-third of the Muslims and one-third to Ram Lala.
While debating on behalf of the Muslim side, Rajiv Dhawan, giving examples of breaking the statue of Buddha by the Taliban, said that he has no hesitation in saying that the mosque which was dropped in 1992 was dropped by the Hindu Talibanis. Accusing the UP government on behalf of the Muslim side, the government said that the government had to have a role to play in this matter, but they broke it.
The bench of Chief Justice Deepak Mishra and Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazir will pronounce their verdict. The bench had reserved it on July 20.
A native of the Ayodhya case, M Siddique, had objected to these specific findings in the 1994 judgment of M Ismail Farooqi, which stated that the mosque is not an integral part of the prayers to be paid by followers of Islam. Siddiq is dead and his representation is his legal heir.
The Muslim groups have argued before the bench headed by Chief Justice that in this judgment, the review of the Supreme Court needs to be re-considered by a five-member bench because it will affect the Babri Masjid-Ram temple land dispute case.
The Uttar Pradesh government had told the apex court that some Muslim groups demanding reconsideration of the 1994 remarks regarding 'an integral part of Islam is not due to the mosque', the long pending Ayodhya temple - trying to delay the mosque land dispute case Are there. Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing on behalf of the deputy government, had said that this dispute is waiting for a final decision from nearly a century.
Senior advocate Rajiv Dhawan, appearing on behalf of Siddiqui legal representative, had said that the mosques are not an integral part of Islam, the remarks were made by the Supreme Court without considering any investigation or religious books.
