Supreme Court dismisses all petitions seeking review of Ayodhya verdict
The Supreme Court today dismissed all the 18 petitions seeking a review of its November 9 Ayodhya judgment. The apex court also denied permission to 40 civil rights activists to file a review petition, as they were not parties to the original case.
The Supreme Court today dismissed all the 18 petitions seeking review of its November 9 Ayodhya judgment. The apex court also denied permission to 40 civil rights activists to file review petitions, as they were not parties to the original case.
A five-judge bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde comprised Justices DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan, S Abdul Nazeer, and Sanjiv Khanna. Former Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi was replaced by Justice Khanna in the new bench, after the former retired from the his post last month. The bench heard the review petitions in-chamber, instead in open court.
Eighteen review petitions on Ayodhya land dispute verdict were filed in the court, of which nine were filed by those who were the original parties in the case. The other nine were filed by third parties. The majority of petitions were filed by Muslim parties which include – Jamiat-Ulama-i-Hind and All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) – expressing their discontentment with the verdict.
The apex court in its historic judgment had ruled in favour of the Hindus parties by giving them 2.77 acres of the disputed site for the construction of a Ram temple and ordered the Uttar Pradesh government to allocate five-acre of land in a prominent place in Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board for constructing a mosque.
Jamiat-i-Hind in its petition filed on December 2 had contended that the judgment of the court amounts to giving validity to the Hindu parties’ action of demolishing the Babri Masjid. The verdict of the court seems to reward the criminal action of the Hindu parties by giving them title to the disputed site, said Jamiat in its petition.
They had further contended that despite acknowledging that the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1993 amounted to a criminal action, the court went on to reward the crimes of the Hindu parties by giving judgment in their favour. If justice is to prevail, then it can be done in this case only by allowing restitution of the damage done to the Muslim parties i.e., ordering for the reconstruction of the Babri Masjid.
The Jamiat-i-HInd in its petition also said that the court gave precedence to oral testimonies of the Hindu parties and disregarded the documentary evidence produced by the Muslim parties to show that the structure in question had always been a mosque and had been in exclusive possession of the Muslims.
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board contended that the court was wrong in awarding the title to the Hindu parties, since the court acknowledged the fact that the site was in exclusive possession of the Muslims and they entered and prayed at the disputed site uninterruptedly till 1949.
Their petition further contended that the judgment of the top court gives legal sanctions to the crimes committed by Hindu parties – criminal trespassing and vandalising the personal property. The petition added that the court erred in the verdict by handing over the possession of the disputed site to Ram Lalla, when the court itself had acknowledged that the idol was forcibly and illegally placed there by the Hindu parties.
One of the major Hindu parties, Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha had also filed a review petition challenging the Supreme Court’s direction to the Uttar Pradesh government to allot 5 acres of land to Uttar Pradesh Sunni Waqf Board for the construction of a mosque as a “compensatory measure”.
In their review petition, they argued that the Muslim parties have failed to prove the construction in question at the site is a ‘mosque.
The plea filed on behalf of the Hindu Mahasabha by Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain also urged the top court to reconsider the references made by the court to the same structure as “mosque” or as a “masjid” and the same shall be expunged.
“The building in dispute could not be termed as mosque or masjid or Babari Masjid. In view of the fact and law concerning the case, it would be desirable that the Hon’ble Court may delete the word Babri mosque/ Babri Masjid/mosque/masjid in paragraph 788 (XVIII) and wherever occurs in the judgment and the same may be substituted by the word ‘disputed structure’,” it read.
The petitioner had also made submissions as to why the Hindu parties should not be condemned for the demolition of the Babri mosque on December 6, 1992. The rationale that the petitioner gave for this submission is that Muslims never had a claim to the Ayodhya site. Even if there was a time when they offered prayers in the inner courtyard of the site, it amounts to an encroachment on the sacred land and place of worship for the Hindus.
On December 9, 40 activists and members of civil society, including historian Irfan Habib, economist Prabhat Patnaik, activist Harsh Mander, and sociologist Nandini Sundar had also filed review petitions, saying the said judgment errs in both facts and law.
The government has listed five new ones and one to amend the contentious Waqf law out of 15 bills for the winter session of Parliament. The session will kick off on November 25 and conclude on December 20.
The government has introduced five new bills, including the Coastal Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to promote coasting trade and increase the participation of Indian-flagged vessels owned and operated by Indian citizens for both national security and commercial purposes.
Another significant legislation that will be introduced by the government is the Indian Ports Bill, 2024. This bill is designed to implement measures for the conservation of ports, enhance security, and manage pollution, ensuring compliance with India’s international obligations and statutory requirements.
Additionally, the government plans to introduce the Merchant Shipping Bill, 2024, which aims to meet India’s obligations under maritime treaties and support the development of Indian shipping while ensuring the efficient operation of the Indian mercantile marine in a way that serves national interests.
Pending legislation includes the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, which is awaiting consideration and passage after the joint committee of both Houses submits its report to the Lok Sabha. The committee is expected to report by the end of the first week of the winter session.
Currently, there are eight bills, including the Waqf (Amendment) Bill and the Mussalman Wakf (Repeal) Bill, pending in the Lok Sabha, while two additional bills are in the Rajya Sabha.
Furthermore, the government has also listed the Punjab Courts (Amendment) Bill for introduction, consideration, and passage, which seeks to increase the pecuniary appellate jurisdiction of Delhi district courts from Rs 3 lakh to Rs 20 lakh.
The Merchant Shipping Bill, along with the Coastal Shipping Bill and the Indian Ports Bill, is slated for introduction and eventual passage.
International Criminal Court issues arrest warrant against Israel PM Benjamin Netanyahu over war crimes
The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare.
The International Criminal Court (ICC) today issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defence Minister Yoav Gallant over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity.
The court accused Prime Minister Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant of crimes against humanity, including murder, persecution, inhumane acts, and the war crime of starvation as a method of warfare. The leaders allegedly restricted essential supplies such as food, water, and medical aid to civilians in Gaza, resulting in severe humanitarian crises and deaths, including among children.
Last year in October, Israel had launched attacks on Gaza in retaliation for the surprise attack by Hamas. The Israel-Hamas war has led to the death of thousands of civilians, while lakhs have been displaced. The major infrastructures in Gaza, including hospitals and schools, were also destroyed as Israel vowed to wipe out Hamas.
The International Criminal Court stated that it found reasonable grounds to believe the accused intentionally targeted civilians and limited medical supplies, forcing unsafe medical procedures, which caused immense suffering. This ruling was based on the findings from at least October 8, 2023 until at least May 20, 2024.
The court remarked that it has assessed that there are reasonable grounds to believe that PM Netanyahu and Defence Minister Gallant bear criminal responsibility as civilian superiors for the war crime of intentionally directing attacks against the civilian population of Gaza.
Furthermore, it also noted that the lack of food, water, electricity and fuel, and medical supplies created conditions of life calculated to bring about the destruction of part of the civilian population in Gaza, leading to death of civilians, including children due to malnutrition and dehydration.
Additionally, the International Criminal Court dismissed two challenges by Israel against its jurisdiction in the situation in the State of Palestine.
Notably, Israel had contested the ICC’s jurisdiction, claiming it could not be exercised without Israel’s consent. Nonetheless, the Chamber ruled that the Court has jurisdiction based on Palestine’s territorial scope, including Gaza, the West Bank, and East Jerusalem. It further noted that Israel’s objections were premature, as jurisdictional challenges under the Rome Statute can only be made after an arrest warrant is issued.
Reportedly, Israel had also requested a fresh notification regarding the investigation, started in 2021. Denying the request, the court stated that Israel had earlier declined to request a deferral, making additional notifications unnecessary.
Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath on Thursday accorded a tax-free status to ‘The Sabarmati Report’ film, based on the train burning incident at Godhra in Gujarat in 2002, in the state.
The announcement was made after Chief Minister Adityanath attended the screening of Vikrant Massey and Raashii Khanna-starrer ‘The Sabarmati Report’ in Lucknow with the film’s cast.
Speaking to reporters, actor Vikrant Massey thanked the Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister for making ‘The Sabarmati Report’ film tax-free in the state. “I want to thank Yogi Adityanath ji. This is an important film and I appeal to everyone to go and watch this film,” he said.
Chief Minister Adityanath along with many of his cabinet colleagues watched the film ‘The Sabarmati Report’ under a special screening at a cinema hall in the capital, said a spokesperson of the state government.
Several people associated with the film unit were also present on the occasion. Later the chief minister announced to make this film tax-free in UP.
The BJP-ruled states have been praising the makers of The Sabarmati Report, claiming the team has tried to bring out this truth in front of the people of the country through the film.
The saffron party is appealing to people to watch this film and try to get closer to the truth of Godhra.
Uttar Pradesh becomes the sixth BJP-ruled state after Haryana, Rajasthan, Chhattisgarh, Madhya Pradesh and Gujarat to declare lead actors Vikrant Massey and Raashii Khanna’s film tax-free.
Adityanath said along with identifying the faces of those who are conspiring against the country for political gains, there is also a need to expose them. The film team has discharged its responsibilities to expose the truth, he said, adding an attempt has been made to bring the real truth in front of the country in a big way through the film.
The Sabarmati Report is said to be based on the incident of setting fire to a train full of ‘karsevaks’ in Godhra on February 27, 2002, killing 90 devotees. After this incident, communal riots broke out in Gujarat. Earlier, Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah have also praised this film.
APN News is today the most watched and the most credible and respected news channel in India. APN has been at the forefront of every single news revolution. The channel is being recognized for its in-depth, analytical reportage and hard hitting discussions on burning issues; without any bias or vested interests.