New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to set up a larger bench for a re-look of its 1994 verdict which held a “mosque is not an essential part of the practice of Islam“, paving the way for the apex court to hear the politically sensitive main Ayodhya title suit.
Ruling that the earlier observation was made in the limited context of “land acquisition” during the hearing of the Ayodhya case, the top court in a 2-1 verdict made it clear it was not relevant for deciding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute whose outcome will be eagerly awaited ahead of the 2019 Lok Sabha polls.
Here is how different politicians, organisations and parties reacted to the verdict of the top court:
Yogi Adityanath, Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister
It is for country’s benefit that the dispute associated with Sri Ramchandra Bhoomi gets resolved at the earliest. Majority of this nation wants a solution to this at the earliest. We appeal that this matter be resolved as soon as possible.
Supreme Court has decided to hold hearing on the Shri Rama Janmabhumi case from 29 October 2018 by a three-member bench. We welcome this decision and are confident that a just verdict will be reached over the case at the earliest.
Asaduddin Owaisi, AIMIM chief
It would have been better if this issue was referred to Constitutional bench. Also, I have an apprehension that the enemies of secularism in this country will use this judgement to realize their ideological objectives.
Priyanka Chaturvedi, Congress
The Congress has always said that whatever the decision of the Supreme Court in the matter of Ram Temple-Babri Masjid, all sides should abide by it and the government should implement it.
Unfortunately, for the last 30 years after 1992, the BJP has been conspiring to mislead and befool the people of the country on the Ram Temple issue. BJP is a party which is double-faced on Ram and has “Nathuram” in their hearts.
D Raja, CPI Leader
People should not fall into the trap laid by some forces over the Ayodhya-linked verdict. Meanwhile, people should remain calm and maintain communal harmony. They should not be carried away by any provocation.
This isn’t a matter of religious dispute, as Ayodhya is an important religious place for Hindus because it is the Ram Janambhoomi but for Muslims, it isn’t a religious place, for them it is Mecca. This matter was created and it finally got transformed into a land dispute.
Subramanian Swamy, BJP
I have contested that I have a fundamental right under Article 25 to offer worship at a place where Lord Ram was born. Supreme Court has now cleared the way for me to press for the fundamental right and that will prevail because now with this Ismail Faruqui judgement being upheld, Sunni Waqf Board had no fundamental right and only ordinary right to appeal for the property, so my superior right will prevail and I hope before Diwali, Ram mandir construction starts.
Alok Kumar, VHP
I am satisfied that this impediment has been defeated. The way is now clear for the hearing of Ram Janmabhoomi appeals.
Rajiv Dhawan, Petitioner’s Counsel in Ayodhya Title Suit Case
Majority judgement will please majority, minority judgement will please minority. Very problem we started off with hasn’t been resolved. Not about arithmetic, but of convincing everybody that SC should’ve spoken in one voice.