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

Farmers Delhi Chalo march suspended after tear gas injuries

Farmers have been camping at the Shambhu and Khanauri border points between Punjab and Haryana since February 13, after security forces halted their march to Delhi.

Published

on

Farmers Delhi Chalo march suspended after tear gas injuries

The protesting farmer unions, Kisan Mazdoor Morcha (KMM) and Samyukt Kisan Morcha (non-political) (SKM-NP) decided to recall the group of 101 farmers who had been marching towards Delhi. This move followed after several farmers including leaders were injured by tear gas shelling from the Haryana Police. 

A group of 101 farmers began their march to Delhi at the Sambhu border, only to be halted a few metres away by a line of barricades. The Haryana police intervened, mentioning a prohibitory order under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), asking the farmers not to proceed further.

Farmers leader Sarwan Singh Pandher told a news agency that they have called back the jatha for today in view of the injuries suffered by a few farmers. Reportedly, farmers are marching to demand a legal guarantee for the minimum support price of crops.

Furthermore, the Ambala district administration has imposed a ban on any unlawful assembly of five or more persons. A group of farmers, holding union flags, pushed down the iron mesh set up by security personnel on the bridge over the Ghaggar River.

Also, mobile internet and bulk SMS services were suspended in 11 villages of Ambala district by the Haryana government on Friday, effective until December 9. The ban reportedly covers Dangdehri, Lohgarh, Manakpur, Dadiyana, Bari Ghel, Lhars, Kalu Majra, Devi Nagar, Saddopur, Sultanpur, and Kakru villages.

Farmers have been camping at the Shambhu and Khanauri border points between Punjab and Haryana since February 13, after security forces halted their march to Delhi. The group began its march at 1 pm, but after covering a few metres, they were stopped by a multi-layered barricade erected by the Haryana government.

The group while chanting Satnam Waheguru and carrying farmers’ union flags and essential items, the jatha crossed the first layer of barricades with ease but could not proceed further. Reports said that a few farmers pushed aside the iron mesh and barbed wire, while others uprooted iron nails from National Highway-44. Water cannon vehicles have also been deployed at the Shambhu border point.

Continue Reading

India News

Farmers Protest: Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan assures MSP for all farm produce

His statement also came on a day when farmers started a foot march to Delhi with a charter of demands, including legal backing for MSP.

Published

on

Farmers Protest: Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan assures MSP for all farm produce

Union Agriculture Minister Shivraj Singh Chouhan today told the Rajya Sabha that the Narendra Modi government would purchase all farm produce at the minimum support price. The Union Minister gave the assurances during Question Hour while responding to supplementary questions on the issue.

His statement also came on a day when farmers started a foot march to Delhi with a charter of demands, including legal backing for MSP. Shivraj Singh Chouhan told in the Rajya Sabha that he wants to assure the House that all produce of farmers will be purchased at minimum support price. He added that this is a Modi government and the guarantee to fulfil Modi guarantee.

Criticizing the Opposition members, the Union Minister said that when the other side were in power, they had said on record that they cannot accept the MS Swaminathan Commission recommendations, especially on giving 50 percent more than the cost of produce. Mentioning that he has the record, he cited former minister of state for agriculture Kantilal Bhuria, ex-agriculture ministers Sharad Pawar and K V Thomas to back his claim.

Following his remarks, Chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar asked him to place on record the documents to substantiate his claim, which Shivraj Singh Chouhan agreed to.

The Union Minister claimed that the Opposition had never honoured the farmers and never gave a serious consideration to farmers’ demands for remunerative prices. He said that he wants to assure the house that since 2019 Prime Minister Narendra Modi has decided to calculate the minimum support price by giving 50 per cent profit on cost of production to farmers.

He further mentioned that the Modi government has been providing remunerative prices to farmers, adding that paddy, wheat, jowar, and soyabean have been purchased at 50 percent above the cost of production for the past three years. He also referred to interventions such as adjustments in export duties and prices whenever commodity rates decline.

Continue Reading

India News

Rajya Sabha chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar says cash found from Congress MP Abhishek Singhvi’s seat, orders probe

The Congress MP denied the charges. He said that he just carries a Rs 500 note when he goes to the Rajya Sabha.

Published

on

Rajya Sabha chairman Jagdeep Dhankhar says cash found from Congress MP Abhishek Singhvi’s seat, orders probe

Rajya Sabha chairperson Jagdeep Dhankhar on Friday said cash was recovered by Parliament security officials from the seat allotted to Congress MP Abhishek Manu Singhvi. The claim by the Rajya Sabha chairperson on the floor of the House led to protests by Congress MPs, with Mallikarjun Kharge stressing that names should not be taken before an investigation.

However, the Congress MP denied the charges. He said that he just carries a Rs 500 note when he goes to the Rajya Sabha. He added that he reached the House at 12:57 pm and the House rose at 1 pm. He continued that later he sat in the canteen till 1:30 pm with Ayodhya MP Awadhesh Prasad and left Parliament.

Nonetheless, the Congress MP and the Senior Advocate welcomed the probe into the incident. He mentioned that each of them must have a seat where the seat itself can be locked, and the key can be carried home by the MP, as everybody can then do things on the seat and make such allegations.

Jagdeep Dhankhar while addressing the Rajya Sabha said that the wad of notes was recovered during routine checks by security officials. He asserted that during a routine check yesterday after adjournment of the House, a wad of currency notes was recovered by security officials from seat no 222 currently allotted to Abhishek Manu Singhvi. An investigation will also take place in accordance with law.

Reacting to the remarks, Senior Congress leader Mallikarjun Kharge said that the Rajya Sabha chairperson said the matter is under investigation. Until it is authenticated, his name should not be mentioned, the Leader of the Opposition in Rajya Sabha noted.

However, Union Minister Kiren Rijiju, said there was nothing wrong in pointing out the seat number and the name of the MP, and demanded proper investigation. BJP chief and Union Health Minister JP Nadda also echoed the same demand, adding that this is an attack on the dignity of the House.

Continue Reading

Trending

© Copyright 2022 APNLIVE.com