Follow nationalizer on WordPress.com

ramjanmabhoomi judgement

questions Hon’ble Sibghat Ullah Khan ,J.

            Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J

Hon’ble Dharam Veer Sharma, J

Whether the disputed site is the birth place of Bhagwan
Ram?

That after some time of construction of the mosque Hindus started identifying the premises
in dispute as exact birth place of Lord Ram or a place wherein exact birth place was situated.

The area covered under the central dome of the disputed structure is
the birthplace of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of Hindus.

The disputed site is the birth place of Lord Ram. Place of
birth is a juristic person and is a deity. It is personified as the spirit of divine worshipped as birth place of Lord Rama as a child.

Whether the disputed building was a mosque? When
was it built? By whom?

The disputed structure was constructed as mosque by or under orders of Babar.It is not proved by direct evidence that premises in dispute including constructed portion
belonged to Babar or the person who constructed the mosque or under whose orders it was
constructed.

Disputed structure was always treated, considered and believed to be
a mosque and practised by Mohammedans for worship accordingly.
However, it has not been proved that it was built during the reign of Babar
in 1528

The disputed building was constructed by Babar, the year
is not certain but it was built against the tenets of Islam. Thus, it
cannot have the character of a mosque.

Whether the mosque was built after demolishing a
Hindu temple

No temple was demolished for constructing the mosque.Mosque was constructed over the ruins of temples which were lying in utter ruins since a
very long time before the construction of mosque and some material thereof was used in
construction of the mosque

The building in dispute was constructed after demolition of Non-
Islamic religious structure, i.e., a Hindu temple.

The disputed structure was constructed on the site of old
structure after demolition of the same. The Archaeological
Survey of India has proved that the structure was a massive
Hindu religious structure.

Whether the idols were placed in the building on the
night of December 22/23rd, 1949?

yes yes yes

What will be the status of the disputed site e.g. inner
and outer courtyard

it is further declared that the portion below the central dome where at present the
idol is kept in makeshift temple will be allotted to Hindus in final decree.
It is further directed that Nirmohi Akhara will be allotted share including that part which is
shown by the words Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi in the said map.
It is further clarified that even though all the three parties are declared to have one third
share each, however if while allotting exact portions some minor adjustment in the share is to be
made then the same will be made and the adversely affected party may be compensated by
allotting some portion of the adjoining land which has been acquired by the Central Government

(i)It is declared that the area covered by the central dome of the three domed structure, i.e., the disputed structure being the deity of Bhagwan Ram Janamsthan
and place of birth of Lord Rama as per faith and belief of the Hindus, belong to plaintiffs (Suit-5) and shall not be obstructed or interfered in any manner by the
defendants.

(ii) The area within the inner courtyard ) belong to members of both the communities, i.e.,
Hindus (here plaintiffs, Suit-5) and Muslims since it was being used by both since
decades and centuries.

(iii) The area covered by the structures, namely, Ram Chabutra,  Sita Rasoi and Bhandar  in the outer courtyard is declared in the share of Nirmohi
Akhara  and they shall be entitled to possession thereof in the absence of any person with better title.

(iv) The open area within the outer courtyard (shall be shared by Nirmohi Akhara (defendant
no. 3) and plaintiffs  since it has been generally used by the Hindu people for worship at both places.

(iv-a) It is however made clear that the share of muslim parties shall not be less
than one third (1/3) of the total area of the premises and if necessary it may be
given some area of outer courtyard. It is also made clear that while making partition by metes and bounds,

It is established that the property in suit is the site of
Janm Bhumi of Ram Chandra Ji and Hindus in general had the right to worship Charan, Sita Rasoi, other idols and other object of worship existed upon the property in suit. It is also established that Hindus have been worshipping the place in dispute as Janm Sthan i.e. a birth place as deity and visiting it as
a sacred place of pilgrimage as of right since time immemorial. After the construction of the disputed structure it is proved the
deities were installed inside the disputed structure on
22/23.12.1949. It is also proved that the outer courtyard was in exclusive possession of Hindus and they were worshipping
throughout and in the inner courtyard (in the disputed
structure) they were also worshipping. It is also established that
the disputed structure cannot be treated as a mosque as it came into existence against the tenets of Islam

Advertisements

One Comment on “ramjanmabhoomi judgement”

  1. […] ramjanmabhoomi judgement […]


Your views please...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s