English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Ismail Faruqui verdict won’t affect Ayodhya tile suit outcome, rules Supreme Court

Published

on

Ismail Faruqui verdict won’t affect Ayodhya tile suit outcome, rules Supreme Court

A three-judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, today (Thursday,September 27), ruling that the Ismail Faruqui verdict in 1994 – that mosques are not integral to Islam – will not affect a decision on the Ayodhya title suit and refused to refer it to a larger bench for further clarification.

The judgment was delivered by a Bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

Justice Bhushan wrote one judgment on behalf of himself and CJI Misra. Justice Nazeer wrote a dissenting judgment.

The Ismail Faruqui verdict, delivered by a Constitution Bench, had been challenged by a bunch of Muslim outfits during proceedings in the Babri Masjid Ram Janmbhoomi title suit. They had argued that the Faruqui case verdict – that mosques are not integral to Islam and thus not a prerequisite for offering namaz – was too “sweeping” and could influence the verdict in the Ram Janmabhoomi land dispute.

In the 2-1 verdict, Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Bhushan held that there was no need to refer the Ismail Faruqui verdict to a larger bench.

The statement in Faruqui case was in the limited context of immunity claimed by the petitioners for the mosque from acquisition, Justice Bhushan said, adding that “it need not be read broadly to mean mosque can never be essential to practise of Islam”.

“The present case shall be decided on its own facts, the Ismail Farooqui judgment would have no impact on it,” Justice Bhushan added.

Justice Nazeer gave a dissenting opinion, stating that whether a mosque is integral to Islam or not is a matter that requires to be considered by a Constitution Bench. He said “questionable observations” in Faruqui ruling were “arrived at without undertaking comprehensive examination” and ‘have permeated” the judgement in the main Ayodhya title suit. He further stated that it needs to be brought in line with the Shirur mutt case. The next hearing has been slated for October 29.

The Ismail Faruqui verdict, 1994

Months after the demolition of the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya in December 1992 by Hindu radicals supported by the RSS-BJP combine, the Congress-led central government enacted the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993. A year later, in October 1994, a five-judge bench of the top court had, in the M Ismail Faruqui Vs. Union of India case, upheld the validity of the Act, vesting jurisdiction of the disputed land in Ayodhya to the Centre.

The fine print of the top court’s verdict, however, gave rise to a new legal conundrum that could, it was argued, be a critical legal precedent that has the potential of determining which way the judgment in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmbhoomi title suit could go.

As reported by India Legal, Paragraph 82 of the Ismail Faruqui verdict states: “there can be no reason to hold that a mosque has a unique or special status”. The interpretation of this line has been taken, especially by the Hindu right that wants control of the disputed land to build a Ram Mandir, to be that the presence of a mosque was not a prerequisite for Muslims to offer namaz.

Additionally, it meant that the government was free to acquire the disputed land on which the Babri Masjid once stood and that a mosque – irrespective of its heritage value or the significance and faith attached to it by the Muslims – held no importance in Islam.

Several Muslims groups who are now party to the long running Babri Masjid-Ram Janmbhoomi title suit had petitioned the Supreme Court to review the Ismail Faruqui verdict on grounds that its reference to the irrelevance of a mosque for offering namaz was a “sweeping observation” and needed reconsideration as “it will have a bearing” on the final outcome of the land dispute.

The Uttar Pradesh government, along with Hindu outfits that are party to the title suit, have opposed the petitions that seek referring Ismail Faruqui to a larger bench. Their resistance is based on the argument that the Muslim outfits were raising the matter belatedly – nearly 25 years after the Ismail Faruqui verdict was delivered – with the sole purpose of delaying the judgment in the land dispute.

Among the arguments, made by counsels for the UP government and the Hindu outfits placing reliance on Ismail Faruqui, is that while the birthplace of Lord Ram cannot be shifted to another site, a mosque with no particular religious significance to the Muslims can be shifted as doing so will “not affect the right to practice religion by offering ‘namaz’ in other mosques”.

Countering these arguments, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for some Muslim petitioners in the title suit, had told the Supreme Court that the Ismail Faruqui verdict had failed to take note of the two critical issues – one, that the idols of Ram Lalla were placed in the disputed premises through an illegal act of trespass and two, the 1986 order by the Rajiv Gandhi-led central government to open the locks of the Babri Masjid premises and allowing the shilanyas was based was on the plea of a person who was not a party in the case and should not have been entertained. Dhavan had also submitted that the Ismail Faruqui verdict was “bad in law” as it denied members of one religious community their fundamental right to the freedom of practicing their religion while upholding the same right for the members of another faith.

India News

Four militants killed as rival Naga groups clash in Manipur village

Four militants were killed in a gunfight between suspected rival Naga groups at Taodaijang village in Manipur’s Noney district on Wednesday.

Published

on

Manipur violence

At least four militants were killed in a gunfight between suspected rival Naga militant groups in Manipur’s Noney district on Wednesday, November 4.

The exchange of fire took place at Taodaijang village in the Khoupum area of the Naga-majority district. According to officials, the cadres involved were suspected to belong to rival Naga militant outfits, including the Zeliangrong United Front-Jenchui (ZUF-J) and the Zeliangrong United Front-Kamson (ZUF-K).

Initial reports indicated that the gunfight continued for several hours, leaving three cadres of ZUF-J and one cadre of ZUF-K dead.

The bodies of the deceased militants were subsequently recovered by local residents.

Residents appeal to armed groups to stop firing

Following the gunfight, local residents, including women, reached the spot in an attempt to prevent further violence between the rival groups.

They also used a public address system to appeal to the armed cadres to stop firing and prevent the situation from escalating further.

Further details about the circumstances surrounding the clash were awaited.

Manipur government reviews security situation

In a separate development, Manipur Chief Minister Yumnam Khemchand Singh directed senior security officials to identify active armed groups suspected of involvement in recent incidents of violence in the state.

The directive excluded groups engaged in peace talks with the state government.

The Chief Minister issued the instructions during a review meeting on the state’s law and order situation on Tuesday night.

He also asked security agencies, including the Army and central paramilitary forces, to submit a detailed report on the involvement of the suspected groups.

The Chief Minister said the state Cabinet could consider declaring such groups unlawful if their involvement in violence against innocent civilians was established.

He also emphasised that necessary action would be initiated against groups continuing to perpetrate violence against civilians.

Continue Reading

India News

Agnipath scheme gets 2-year extension for Agniveers, tenure may rise to 6 years

The Centre has introduced a two-year extension for the remaining 75% of Agniveers under the Agnipath scheme, creating another opportunity for them to seek enrolment in the regular armed forces.

Published

on

The Centre has introduced a significant change to the Agnipath recruitment scheme, offering a two-year extension to Agniveers who were earlier expected to leave the armed forces after completing their initial four-year service.

Chief of Defence Staff (CDS) General NS Raja Subramani announced the decision on Wednesday following a Union Cabinet meeting. Under the revised arrangement, the 75% of Agniveers who were not initially selected for absorption into the regular armed forces will be offered an additional two-year engagement period.

The development creates another opportunity for these personnel to continue serving in the armed forces beyond their original four-year tenure.

What changes under the revised Agnipath scheme?

Under the original Agnipath framework, Agniveers were recruited for a four-year service period, including training. At the end of this tenure, up to 25% of each batch could be selected for permanent enrolment into the regular armed forces, while the remaining 75% were expected to return to civilian life.

The revised arrangement introduces an additional two-year engagement for the latter group. This means their potential service period could increase from four to six years.

The extension also creates another opportunity for Agniveers to seek enrolment into the regular armed forces after completing the additional two years.

What happens after the additional two years?

According to General NS Raja Subramani, Agniveers completing the extended engagement period and willing to continue serving will be considered for enrolment in the regular armed forces.

Their selection will be based on objective criteria.

This creates an additional pathway for those who are not absorbed into the regular forces after their initial four-year tenure. However, the revised arrangement does not mean that every Agniveer will automatically receive permanent enrolment.

Why has the decision been taken now?

The announcement comes as the first batch of Agniveers recruited under the scheme approaches the completion of its initial four-year service period.

The Agnipath scheme was introduced on June 14, 2022, to recruit personnel into the Indian Army, Navy and Air Force for a fixed four-year engagement.

General Raja Subramani said the scheme had been undergoing periodic reviews, with the performance of Agniveers being continuously evaluated. He also indicated that feedback on their performance had been very positive.

The latest Cabinet decision creates an additional route for retaining personnel beyond the initial engagement period.

What was the original Agnipath arrangement?

Under the original framework, the armed forces could retain up to 25% of Agniveers in the regular cadre after their four-year service period, subject to selection.

The remaining 75% were to complete their engagement and transition to civilian life.

With the latest revision, this group will receive an additional two-year engagement opportunity before being considered for enrolment into the regular armed forces under the prescribed selection criteria.

The change therefore modifies the earlier arrangement by providing an additional opportunity for Agniveers to continue their military careers.

Continue Reading

India News

Hardeep Singh Puri set to win Rajya Sabha bypoll unopposed

Union Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to be elected unopposed to the Rajya Sabha from Madhya Pradesh after the returning officer rejected the nomination papers of two independent candidates.

Published

on

Hardeep Puri

Union Petroleum Minister Hardeep Singh Puri is set to enter the Rajya Sabha unopposed from Madhya Pradesh after the nomination papers of two independent candidates were rejected during scrutiny on Tuesday.

The two candidates whose nominations were rejected were Kante Sayanna and Rajkumar Lohani, the latter being backed by the Congress. Their rejection leaves Puri as the only candidate in the contest for the vacant Rajya Sabha seat.

According to an official, the result will be announced on November 5, which is also the last date for withdrawal of nominations.

The Returning Officer, Umesh Sharma, examined the nomination papers on the last day of scrutiny and rejected the two independent candidates’ applications.

Objections raised against Hardeep Puri’s nomination

The nomination papers submitted by Puri also faced objections from the two independent candidates and Congress leader Hemant Katare.

They questioned the validity and completeness of Puri’s affidavit filed in Form 26, raising concerns over whether the mandatory details had been properly furnished.

However, after examining the objections, Returning Officer Umesh Sharma concluded that Puri had not violated any requirements under the Representation of the People Act.

Sharma stated in his order that no defect had been found in Puri’s nomination papers that could justify their rejection.

Following the decision, Katare and Congress MLA Atif Aqeel announced that they would approach the court against the order.

Calling the decision an attack on Indian democracy, the Congress leaders said in a statement that Puri’s nomination should have been rejected despite what they described as significant errors.

Why the Madhya Pradesh Rajya Sabha seat fell vacant

The by-election was necessitated by the resignation of Union Minister L Murugan, which left a Rajya Sabha seat vacant in Madhya Pradesh.

With the nomination papers of both independent candidates rejected and Puri’s nomination cleared, the Union minister is set to be elected unopposed.

The final announcement is expected on November 5, the last day for withdrawal of nominations.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com