Babri mosque dispute: Key litigants not part of final hearing

Agencies
December 5, 2017

Ayodhya, Dec 5: The key litigants in the 25-year-old Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute will not be part of the final proceedings in the Supreme Court.

The reached the local court in 1949 when Mahant Ramchandradas Paramhans approached it for allowing 'darshan and pujan' (worshipping and paying obeisance) to Ram Lalla.

In the same city, Hashim Ansari also approached the court for removing Lord Rama's statue from the Babri mosque.

While Mahant Paramhans died on July 20, 2003, Ansari died in July 2016.

As the Supreme Court takes up the final hearing, both of them will be missed, said local resident Mohammad Idris.

Ansari was a witness when idols of Ram Lalla appeared at the Babri Masjid site on the night of December 22, 1949.

He was the first to file the suit in the court of civil judge of Faizabad against the "illegal encroachment of Masjid by the Hindu Mahasabha".

With Ansari's death, an era in the Ayodhya dispute ended as he was a witness to "placing of Idols in Babri Masjid in 1949", unlocking of the disputed structure for the worship of Ram Lalla as per a court's order in 1987, demolition of the mosque in 1992 and division of the disputed land into three parts by the Lucknow High Court in 2010.

He also became the first plaintiff in the Supreme Court in 2011.

Another known figure in courts was Mahant Bhaskar Das, the chief litigant in the case and the chief priest of the Nirmohi Akhada in Ayodhya.

The Nirmohi Akhada priest had filed a claim for the ownership of Ram Janmaboomi in 1959.

Apart from being the Nirmohi Akhada sarpanch, he was the mahant of the Naka Hanuman Garhi in the temple town.

In 1959, Nirmohi Akhada's mahant Raghunath Das filed a case laying claims over Ram Janmabhoomi.

At that time, Bhaskar Das, who was in charge of rituals at Ram Chabutra on the premises, too, joined the case and filed the claim.

After the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court gave a verdict in the case on September 30, 2010, Bhaskar Das filed a petition in the Supreme Court for ownership of the entire premises. Bhaskar died in September.

Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) leader Ashok Singhal, who died in 2015, was considered architect of the Ram temple movement. In the 1980s Singhal became a symbol of the Ayodhya movement.

Singhal was sent to the VHP by the then RSS chief Bala Saheb Deoras in 1981.

He had launched the Ram Janki Rath Yatra in 1985 and had demanded the opening of the locks at Ram Janmabhoomi.

While the opening of the locks was ordered by the local Faizabad court, Singhal launched a movement to build a temple.

Though the matter is sub judice, these key figures and their roles will always be noted in their respective camps.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 25,2024

modirahul.jpg

The Election Commission of India on Thursday announced that it had taken cognisance of violations to the Model Code of Conduct by both Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Congress leader Rahul Gandhi.

While Modi has indulged in a diatribe against Muslims, without naming them, using terms like 'infiltrators' and 'those with more children', Rahul has been accused of making a false claim about 'rise in poverty'.

Both the BJP and INC have raised allegations of causing hatred and divisions based on caste, religion, language, and community, ANI reported.

While the EC had initially refused to comment on Modi's speeches, sources had told PTI that the commission was 'looking into' the remarks made by the BJP leader.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 26,2024

evm.jpg

The Supreme Court of India on Friday, April 26, rejected pleas seeking 100% cross-verification of votes cast using EVMs with a Voter Verifiable Paper Audit Trail (VVPAT) and said “blindly distrusting” any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism.

A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta delivered two concurring verdicts. It dismissed all the pleas in the matter, including those seeking to go back to ballot papers in elections.

An EVM comprises three units – the ballot unit, the control unit and the VVPAT. All three are embedded with microcontrollers with a burnt memory from the manufacturer. Currently, VVPATs are used in five booths per assembly constituency.

EVM VVPAT case: Supreme Court issues two directives

1.    Justice Khanna directed the Election Commission of India to seal and store units used to load symbols for 45 days after the symbols have been loaded to electronic voting machines in strong rooms.

2.    The Supreme Court also allowed engineers of the EVM manufacturers to verify the microcontroller of the machines after the declaration of the results at the request of candidates who stood second and third. The top court said the request for the verification of the microcontroller can be made within seven days of the declaration of the results after payment of fees.

Option for candidates to seek verification of EVM programmes

•    Candidates who secure second and third position in the results can request for the verification of burnt memory semicontroller in 5% of the EVMs per assembly segment in a Parliamentary constituency. The written request to be made within seven days of the declaration of the results.

•    *On receiving such a written request, the EVMs shall be checked and verified by a team of engineers from the manufacturer of the EVMs.

•    Candidates should identify the EVMs to be checked by a serial number of the polling booth.

•    Candidates and their representatives can be present at the time of the verification.

•    After verification, the district electoral officer should notify the authenticity of the burnt memory.

•    Expenses for the verification process, as notified by the ECI, should be borne by the candidate making the request.
What did the Supreme Court say?

•    "If EVM is found tampered during verification, fees paid by the candidates will be refunded," the bench said.

•    "While maintaining a balanced perspective is crucial in evaluating systems or institutions, blindly distrusting any aspect of the system can breed unwarranted scepticism...," Justice Datta said.

Who filed the petitions?

NGO Association for Democratic Reforms, one of the petitioners, had sought to reverse the poll panel's 2017 decision to replace the transparent glass on VVPAT machines with an opaque glass through which a voter can see the slip only when the light is on for seven seconds.

The petitioners have also sought the court's direction to revert to the old system of ballot papers.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
April 23,2024

nehalove.jpg

Hubballi, Apr 23: Karnataka Chief Minister Siddaramaiah on Tuesday spoke to father of slain student Neha Hiremath over phone and said "sorry" over his daughter's killing, and assured that "we will be on your side".

The Chief Minister also informed Niranjan Hiremath, who is also a Congress councillor of Hubballi-Dharwad Municipal Corporation, about the government's decision to hand over the murder case to the Criminal Investigation Department (CID) and setting up a special court to fast-track trial.

"Niranjan... very sorry. We will be on your side," Siddaramaiah told Hiremath over the phone call during state's Law and Parliamentary Affairs Minister H K Patil's visit to Hiremath's house here.

In the conversation on Patil's phone with speakers on, Siddaramaiah can be heard informing Hiremath about the CID probe and setting up a special court.

"It is a serious offence... setting up a special court will ensure punishment for the accused person."

Hiremath thanked Siddaramaiah on behalf of his family well-wishers and the community for handing over the case to CID and setting up a special court "...ensure there is an order at the earliest and provide us justice," he said, as he also thanked Patil, Home Minister G Parameshwara, local Congress MLA Prasad Abbayya and others for their support.

Replying to this, Siddaramaiah said, "We will ensure it, at the earliest."

In a shocking incident, Neha Hiremath (23), was stabbed to death on the campus of BVB College last Thursday. The accused Fayaz Khondunaik, who fled from the scene, was arrested by the police subsequently.

Neha was a first year Master of Computer Application (MCA) student and Fayaz was earlier her classmate.

Siddaramaih on Monday had announced his government has decided to hand over the investigation into the incident to the Crime Investigation Department, and to set up a special court for speedy disposal of the case.

The case of brutal murder, which sparked widespread outrage, has snowballed into a political slugfest between ruling Congress and opposition BJP.

While the ruling party has tried to project it as an incident with personal angle, the saffron party has called it a "love jihad" case and has said it's a testimony of deterioration of law and order in the state.

Earlier, Siddarmaiah's statement that the murder was due to "personal reasons" and Home Minister G Parameshwara's comments that the duo was in love, has elicited sharp reactions from Hiremath and family members and opposition parties.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.