Issues for briefing - Justice Dharam Veer Sharma
Ayodhya: Issues for briefing - Justice Dharam Veer Sharma
This is the full text of the Gist of Ayodhya Title suit Judgement made by Honorable Dharam Veer Sharma, member of three-member Lucknow bench, in Ram Janmbhumi-Babri masjid title dispute. - Issues for brieifing
Summary by Justice Dharam Veer Sharma 1
ISSUES FOR BRIEFING
1.
Whether
the
disputed
site
is
the
birth
place
of
Bhagwan
Ram?
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.
Spirit
of
divine
ever
remains
present
every
where
at
all
times
for
any
one
to
invoke
at
any
shape
or
form
in
accordance
with
his
own
aspirations
and
it
can
be
shapeless
and
formless
also.
Gist of Ayodhya Judgement by Special bench of Alahabad High Court - ZIP file
2. Whether the disputed building was a mosque? When was it built? By whom?
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.
Ayodhya: Findings by Justice Sudhir Agarwal
Ayodhya: Findings by Justice Sibghat Ullah Khan
3. Whether the mosque was built after demolishing 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.
4. Whether the idols were placed in the building on the night of December 22/23rd, 1949?
The idols were placed in the middle dome of the disputed structure in the intervening night of 22/23.12.1949.
5. Whether any of the claims for title is time barred?
O.O.S.
No.
4
of
1989,
the
Sunni
Central
Board
of
Waqfs
U.P.,
Lucknow
and
others
Vs.
Gopal
Singh
Visharad
and
others
and
O.O.S.
No.3
of
1989,
Nirmohi
Akhara
and
Another
Vs.
Sri
Jamuna
Prasad
Singh
and
others
are
barred
by
time.
6. What will be the status of the disputed site e.g. inner and outer courtyard?
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.