The Supreme Court on Wednesday began the hearing on Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid land dispute case. While hearing the issue, Supreme Court told Subramanian Swamy that he is not a party to the core issue of Ayodhya matter. Replying to which, Subramanian Swamy said in the Supreme Court that his fundamental rights are higher than his property rights. The Supreme Court has dismissed all the intervention applications filed in the case.
In the previous hearing, the Supreme Court had said that it will declare its final verdict on the matter on March 14, 2018. The court in its previous hearing delayed the verdict as some of the documents and translations were yet to be filed before it. The bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S Abdul Nazeer, however, made it clear that it would deal with the case as a “pure land dispute”. “Once we start hearing the case, it will go on,” the apex court said. On December 5, 2017, the bench had said it would begin the crucial hearing on the petitions from February 8.
Meanwhile, while the Supreme Court is hearing the matter in the court, the spiritual guru who has a mass following across the world, has been for long trying his efforts to mediate the talks between both the parties and has been pitching for an out of the court settlement. Several times, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has met the representatives of both the parties — Ram Temple and Babri Masjid — and has tried to mediate the talks for an out of court settlement.
The Ram Janmabhomi-Babri Masjid issue in Ayodhya has been going on for years which also posses a violent history. The issue has a national political importance and time and again, the political parties have used the issue to garner votes and set their national political agenda.
Ayodhya verdict highlights
04:14 PM: While hearing the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid land dispute case, the Supreme Court has fixed the matter for further hearing on March 23.
03:47 PM: Hearing the Ayodhya matter, the Supreme Court said that the case cannot be sent to the Constitution bench. The Supreme Court clearly said no to refer the matter to the constitution bench. The top court also said that no fresh appeal will be heard.
03:42 PM: We can’t ask anyone to settle and we can’t say no to settlement. If lawyers of both sides stand up and tell us they’ve settled the issue, we’ll record it. We can’t appoint or suggest anyone for settlement. How can we do this in a case like this, the Supreme Court said.
03:24PM: While hearing the Ayodhya case, the Supreme Court said that no one will put pressure on the main parties to have a compromise in the issue. The court said this after an intervention party mentioned that around 10523 people have signed their petition that there should be a compromise in the issue.
03:20PM: A lawyer representing the Uttar Pradesh government Tushar Mehta also asked the Supreme Court that third-party intervention should not be entertainment.
03:16PM: During the Ayodhya matter hearing, the Muslim side asked the Supreme Court that it should listen to only the main parties related to the issue. Following which the Supreme Court said dismissed as many as 32 intervention applications.
03:15PM: The Supreme Court dismissed as many as 32 intervention applications in the case including those of Aparna Sen, Shyam Benegal, and Teesta Setalvad
03:01PM: Ayodhya verdict LIVE: Supreme Court dismisses intervention applications; Swamy’s plea to be heard by separate bench
02:54PM: Supreme Court to Subramanian Swamy — You are not a party in the core issue