Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, an eminent Muslim group, had filed a petition and sought a review of the verdict on the Ayodhya Temple – Babri Masjid dispute. Petitioner Maulana Rashidi, the legal heir of the case’s plaintiff, argued for a holistic verdict and the legality of the basis on which the judges pronounced the verdict.
Crux of the Matter
Petitioner, Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi, said that the petition sought stay on the transfer of land for temple construction after the court had granted a judicial writ to destroy Babri Masjid.
The petition counted three illegalities that were acknowledged by the Court which pronounced the decision to transfer the 2.77 acres of the disputed land for Ram Temple construction and another 5 acres of land in a prominent location for the construction of a Masjid.
The three illegalities were: damage to the Babri Masjid tomb in 1934, the sacrilege of the mosque by instituting Lord Ram’s idol in 1949, and the demolition of the structure in 1992.
Moreover, the petition sought clarification on the reliability of the Archeological Survey of India‘s (ASI) report which was quintessential for the verdict.
Curiopedia
Ayodhya dispute is a political, historical and socio-religious debate in India, centred on a plot of land in the city of Ayodhya, located in Faizabad district, Uttar Pradesh. The issues revolves around the control of a site traditionally regarded among Hindus to be the birthplace of Rama; the history and location of the Babri Masjid at the site, and whether a previous Hindu temple was demolished or modified to create the mosque. The Babri Masjid was destroyed during a political rally which turned into a riot on 6 December 1992. More Info
Curated Coverage
Comments