English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar meets Adityanath, stakeholders in Ayodhya dispute downplay mediation efforts

Published

on

yogi-adityanath

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]The BJP downplayed it and the Muslim bodies, too, rebuffed it, while the Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Shia Waqf Board claimed that their attempt at playing mediator to resolve the Ayodhya dispute is neither a publicity stunt nor is it politically motivated.

Questioning their intentions, as none of them is a party in the case, the stakeholders in the Ayodhya case slammed Sri Sri Ravi Shankar and Waseem Rizvi of Shia Waqf Board, the two who have been talking of arriving at a reconciliation formula.

Ravi Shankar met Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath in Lucknow ahead of his visit to Ayodhya on Thursday, a meeting described by a senior state official as a “courtesy meeting” which lasted about 15-20 minutes and went off well.

“As far as the Ayodhya issue is concerned, Adityanath’s stand is very clear. The state government is not a party. We welcome any settlement and will honour the decision of the court,” he said, according to media reports.

This was more in accordance with the line taken by senior RSS functionary Ram Madhav, who is now BJP national general secretary. Madhav Wednesday downplayed Ravi Shankar’s visit to Ayodhya. He said first the legal process should be allowed to be completed in the Supreme Court, and only after that should other options be explored.

Speaking to ANI, Madhav said, “The legal proceedings are at an advanced stage in the Supreme Court right now. We all should allow the legal process to be completed in the Supreme Court. Once that’s done, then other options can be explored. So right now the matter should be left for Supreme Court to decide.”

Earlier, Adityanath had welcomed Ravi Shankar’s move and said that any such move to mediate between the two parties was welcome. Adityanath said that talks were the only way out to find a solution to the dispute. He said that if no consensus is reached through talks, the court will take a decision on Ayodhya.

“Talks had begun earlier also and one party always excluded itself from it, so the problem is not that there should be talks, but that both parties should agree to it. Good results can come out of such talks, but the intention should be right,” Adityanath had earlier said.

That seems to have changed now. Besides the BJP, the Sunni Board and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) also rebuffed the mediation efforts, saying Ravi Shankar had no legal standing on the Ayodhya matter and hence they had decided to reject his offer for a dialogue on the issue.

On the other hand, escalating the mediation move, Home Minister Rajnath Singh also met Muslim and Sufi clerics in the national capital for talks over the Ayodhya matter.

Ravi Shankar has refuted his critics’ claim that his efforts to mediate in the matter were influenced by the governments and has repeatedly stated that he was doing it “at his own will”.

Earlier this week, Ravi Shankar had said in Delhi that he was involved as a mediator in the Ram Temple dispute of his own will and would visit Ayodhya on November 16 to meet all stakeholders. He said he did not have an agenda and would listen to everybody.

Initiating his mediation effort, Ravi Shankar last month met Uttar Pradesh Shia Waqf Board Chief Wasim Rizvi in Bengaluru regarding the issue and Rizvi had described his meeting with the spiritual leader as “very positive”. Rizvi had said, “We are the real stakeholders here,” adding that the board welcomes Sri Sri’s initiative. He went on to say that the construction of the Ram Temple can begin as early as 2018.

On Monday, Waseem Rizvi and Ravi Shankar held a meeting on the Ayodhya issue after the former met saints in Ayodhya and leaders of the Akhada Parishad in Allahabad. Soon after his meeting, Rizvi, along with Narendra Giri, announced that the reconciliation was done. He further declared Ram temple will be built in Ayodhya, while the mosque will be constructed in the Muslim-dominated Ayodhya-Faizabad area.

However, while Art of living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met Adityanath on Wednesday, the Shia Personal Law Board clarified that the Board does not agree to the claims made by the Shia Waqf Board. The Board labelled the claims made by Shia Waqf Board Chairman Waseem Rizvi as a publicity stunt.

All India Shia Personal Law Board member, Maulana Yasoob Abbas told News18, “Settlement is good, but how can you say that you are giving up the mosque land? A mosque is the house of Allah and the All India Shia Personal Law Board is certainly not ready to give up the mosque land. The Board certainly does not agree to what Waseem Rizvi or the Shia Waqf Board has claimed.”

The efforts for mediation in Ayodhya dispute have thus received a cold reception.

The Supreme Court had suggested that an out-of-court settlement was the best recourse to the dispute.

The apex court will commence the final hearing of the long-standing matter from December 5, a day before the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the medieval-era Babri Masjid, built by Mughal Emperor Babar in 1528.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]

India News

Supreme Court questions EC over missing records in Sringeri election dispute

The Supreme Court questioned the Election Commission over missing video footage of the 2023 counting in Karnataka’s Sringeri constituency. The case involves a revised result following a recount of postal ballots.

Published

on

The Supreme Court on Wednesday questioned the Election Commission of India (ECI) over its inability to locate video recordings of the original vote counting in Karnataka’s Sringeri Assembly constituency in 2023. The court said it would not accept what it described as “lame excuses” and directed the poll body to produce whatever records are available at the next hearing.

A bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Sanjeev Sachdeva expressed displeasure after the Election Commission’s counsel informed it that the footage of the original counting could not be traced.

The bench also warned that it could draw an adverse inference if the required documents were not produced.

Questioning how the poll body could lose records relating to an election it had conducted, the judges stressed that maintaining election documentation was central to its responsibilities.

“How can the Election Commission of India say that it has lost the records? Your whole purpose is to hold an election, and you need to have a document. Where is the question of you saying we are trying to trace it?” the bench asked.

“We will not accept these kinds of lame excuses,” it added.

What is the Sringeri election dispute?

The case stems from the 2023 Karnataka Assembly election in Sringeri, where Congress leader TD Rajegowda was initially declared the winner.

The result was challenged by BJP candidate Jeevaraj before the Karnataka High Court. The High Court later ordered a recount of postal ballots, including the reverification of 279 rejected postal votes.

Following the recount, the Returning Officer declared a revised result in which Jeevaraj was declared the winner. Rajegowda then approached the Supreme Court to challenge the revised outcome.

In May, the Supreme Court granted interim relief to Rajegowda, directing that he continue as the Member of the Legislative Assembly while his plea remained pending.

Rajegowda seeks counting records and observer’s report

Rajegowda has sought access to the election observer’s report and video recordings of both the original counting conducted in 2023 and the recount held this year.

The missing original counting footage became a point of concern during Wednesday’s hearing, with the bench questioning the Election Commission’s inability to trace the recording.

The court directed the Commission to submit whatever records it possesses at the next hearing. Its warning about a possible adverse inference underscores the importance the bench attached to the production of the requested documents.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for February 15, 2027.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi joins India Gate protest by Ankita Bhandari’s parents

Rahul Gandhi joined the protest by Ankita Bhandari’s parents at India Gate in New Delhi on October 14. The demonstration has brought renewed attention to the 2022 murder case and the family’s concerns following Dushyant Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim Governor.

Published

on

Congress leader Rahul Gandhi joined a protest by the parents of Ankita Bhandari at India Gate in New Delhi on Wednesday, October 14, bringing renewed attention to the 2022 murder case from Uttarakhand.

The family’s demonstration follows the appointment of Dushyant Gautam, a former BJP leader associated with the party’s Uttarakhand organisation, as Governor of Sikkim. The appointment has prompted objections from Ankita’s family and political leaders, who have raised concerns about the case and the demand for justice.

Congress MP Priyanka Gandhi Vadra also met the family, according to reports.

Why Ankita Bhandari’s family is protesting

Ankita Bhandari, 19, worked as a receptionist at a resort in Uttarakhand. She was murdered in September 2022, and the case triggered widespread public anger and demands for accountability.

The protest has returned to the spotlight amid questions raised by the family and activists over the alleged role of a VIP in the case. These allegations and demands should be distinguished from findings established through the criminal proceedings.

Dushyant Gautam’s appointment as Sikkim Governor has become a fresh point of contention because his name has been linked to allegations surrounding the alleged VIP connection. Such allegations should not be treated as proof of involvement in the crime.

Political reactions and demand for justice

Rahul Gandhi’s participation brought the Congress leadership into the family’s latest protest in the national capital. The demonstration reflects continuing demands for accountability and further clarity over the concerns raised by the family.

The case has remained a subject of public and political debate, including questions about the investigation and the alleged VIP connection. The family’s concerns and the political reactions have renewed attention on the demand for justice for Ankita Bhandari.

Continue Reading

India News

Meerut murder: Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla get death sentence

A Meerut court has sentenced Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla to death in the blue drum murder case involving the killing of merchant navy officer Saurabh Rajput in March 2025.

Published

on

A court in Meerut has sentenced Muskaan Rastogi and Sahil Shukla to death for the murder of Saurabh Rajput, Muskaan’s husband and a former Merchant Navy officer. The sentencing was pronounced on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, after the court convicted the two in the case widely known as the Meerut blue drum murder.

The case involved the killing of Rajput in March 2025 and the concealment of his dismembered remains inside a blue plastic drum sealed with cement and sand.

The two were convicted on September 30. The prosecution had sought the death penalty, arguing for the maximum punishment in the case.

Court verdict follows 126 hearings

The trial involved 126 hearings and statements from 22 prosecution witnesses. District Judge Arvind Kumar Mishra delivered the sentence after the court considered the evidence presented during the proceedings.

The investigation and prosecution relied on a combination of circumstantial, technical and physical evidence. This included forensic findings, witness testimony and material recovered during the investigation.

The case drew attention after police discovered Rajput’s remains inside the cement-filled drum at the couple’s residence in Meerut.

How Saurabh Rajput was killed

According to the prosecution’s account of the case, Rajput was killed in March 2025 after he returned to Meerut from London. Investigators alleged that Muskaan and Sahil had planned the murder.

The prosecution said Rajput was given food laced with sleeping medication before he was attacked. His body was subsequently dismembered, and the remains were placed inside a blue plastic drum.

The drum was filled with a mixture containing cement and sand and sealed. Investigators later recovered the remains from inside it.

Evidence presented during the investigation

Investigators built the case using several strands of evidence. Shopkeepers provided testimony about the purchase of materials, including a blue drum, cement, sand and cutting implements, before the murder.

Call detail records and mobile tower information were also cited to establish Sahil’s presence at the residence around the time of the crime. The prosecution further relied on post-mortem findings that confirmed Rajput had died from stab injuries.

The investigation also traced the movements of Muskaan and Sahil during their trip to Himachal Pradesh following the killing. Investigators said photographs and activity linked to Rajput’s phone were used to create the impression that he was still alive.

The case came to light in March 2025

The murder came to light after questions arose over Rajput’s whereabouts. According to the investigation, the couple’s attempt to move the heavy drum eventually raised suspicion.

Rajput’s family approached the police, leading to an investigation that uncovered the remains. Muskaan and Sahil were arrested in March 2025.

The sentencing on October 14 marks a major development in the case, which had proceeded from the discovery of Rajput’s remains to a trial involving dozens of witness statements and more than a hundred hearings.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com