English हिन्दी
Connect with us

India News

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.

Published

on

Supreme Court

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.

India News

Congress, BJP attack Bhagwant Mann over remarks on Punjab blasts

Congress and BJP have jointly criticised Punjab CM Bhagwant Mann after he linked recent blasts near defence sites to political motives, triggering a controversy.

Published

on

Bhagwant Mann

A political row has erupted in Punjab after Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann linked recent blast incidents to political motives, drawing sharp criticism from both the Congress and the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP).

The controversy follows two low-intensity explosions reported within a short span of time — one near the Border Security Force (BSF) headquarters in Jalandhar and another close to an army cantonment area in Amritsar. The incidents raised concerns over security, particularly given the sensitive nature of the locations.

In response, Mann suggested that the blasts could be part of a larger political strategy. His remarks triggered a strong backlash, with opposition parties accusing him of politicising a serious security issue.

Leaders from the Congress criticised the Chief Minister’s statement, calling it inappropriate and alleging that such comments undermine the gravity of the situation. They stressed that matters related to national security should be handled with caution and responsibility.

The BJP also joined the criticism, questioning the basis of Mann’s claims and urging the state government to focus on investigation and law enforcement instead of making political allegations.

The developments have led to an unusual moment where both Congress and BJP appear aligned in their criticism of the Aam Aadmi Party-led government in the state.

Meanwhile, the blasts themselves have intensified concerns over safety in border regions, with authorities continuing their investigation into the incidents. No casualties were reported, but the proximity to defence establishments has made the issue particularly sensitive.

The episode has further escalated political tensions in the state, with security and accountability emerging as key points of debate.

Continue Reading

India News

Himanta Biswa Sarma resigns as Assam chief minister, oath ceremony likely after May 11

Himanta Biswa Sarma resigns as Assam Chief Minister after BJP-led NDA’s victory. He will continue as caretaker CM until the new government is sworn in after May 11.

Published

on

Himanta sharma

Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma resigned from his post on Wednesday, paving the way for the formation of a new government after the BJP-led NDA secured a decisive victory in the 2026 Assembly elections.

Sarma submitted his resignation to Governor Lakshman Prasad Acharya at Lok Bhawan in Guwahati. The Governor accepted the resignation and asked him to continue as the caretaker Chief Minister until the new government takes charge.

The resignation comes after the NDA’s strong electoral performance, where the alliance won a clear majority in the 126-member Assembly, ensuring its return to power for another term.

Oath ceremony expected after May 11

Speaking to reporters after submitting his resignation, Sarma said the swearing-in ceremony for the new government is likely to be held after May 11.

He indicated that Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been invited to attend the ceremony but is unavailable until May 11, which has influenced the tentative schedule.

Decision on next chief minister soon

Sources suggest that central observers, including senior BJP leaders, are expected to arrive shortly to oversee the selection of the legislature party leader. The newly elected MLAs will then decide on the next Chief Minister.

Despite the formal resignation, party sources indicate that Sarma is likely to continue in the role for another term, given the BJP’s strong mandate in the state.

The move marks the beginning of the government formation process in Assam following the election results declared earlier this week.

Continue Reading

India News

Rahul Gandhi and Vijay alliance took shape through backchannel talks, early signals from Congress leaders

Congress outreach and political calculations led to Rahul Gandhi and Vijay coming together after the Tamil Nadu 2026 election results.

Published

on

The coming together of Rahul Gandhi and actor-politician Vijay in Tamil Nadu after the 2026 Assembly elections was not sudden, but the result of behind-the-scenes political manoeuvring and early signals within the Congress.

According to media reports, some leaders in the Tamil Nadu Congress had already sensed the scale of Vijay’s surge during the campaign, anticipating what was later described as a “wave” in favour of his party.

After the results, where Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) emerged as the single largest party but fell short of a majority, communication channels between the Congress leadership and Vijay quickly became active.

A key moment in this evolving political equation was a phone call from Rahul Gandhi to Vijay, congratulating him on the party’s strong performance. The conversation was seen as more than a courtesy, signalling the possibility of cooperation at a time when government formation required additional support.

Reports indicate that discussions within Congress weighed the political benefits of supporting Vijay, especially given the shifting dynamics in the state where traditional dominance by major Dravidian parties has been challenged.

With TVK needing allies to cross the majority mark, Congress emerged as a potential partner, leading to a broader political realignment in the state. This development also triggered tensions within opposition alliances, highlighting the strategic importance of the decision.

The evolving partnership reflects a mix of electoral pragmatism and changing voter sentiment, particularly the growing influence of younger voters, which leaders acknowledged as a key factor in the election outcome.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com