• search
For Quick Alerts
For Daily Alerts

Ayodhya hearing was not the longest in the history of the Supreme Court


New Delhi, Nov 11: The hearing in the politically and religiously sensitive decades-old temple-mosque land dispute in Ayodhya was the second-longest proceedings in the history of the Supreme Court which had lasted for 40 days.

The high voltage hearing in the Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute involving 2.77 acres of land had commenced on August 6 and concluded on October 16, and the Supreme Court pronounced the verdict on Saturday.

Ayodhya hearing was not the longest in the history of the Supreme Court

In the unanimous verdict, the court cleared the way for the construction of a Ram Temple at the disputed site and directed the Centre to allot a 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque.

In Ayodhya verdict, SC referred to books in Sanskrit, Urdu, Persian, French

In one of the most important and most anticipated judgements in India's history, a 5-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi put an end to the more than a century-old dispute that has torn the social fabric of the nation.

The arguments in the matter were the second-longest after the landmark Keshvanand Bharti case in 1973 during which the proceedings for propounding the doctrine of the basic structure of the Constitution continued for 68 days.

On the concluding day of the marathon hearing, the bench had observed "enough is enough". The day was marked by high drama when Rajeev Dhawan, a senior counsel for the Muslim parties, tore a pictorial map provided by Hindu Mahasabha purportedly showing the exact birthplace of Lord Ram in Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh.

Ayodhya verdict: At 92, K Parasaran, the 'Pitamaha' of India Bar, emerges as hero

The third longest hearing in the top court was on the validity of Aadhaar scheme and had lasted for 38 days in the top court which came into existence in 1950.

Ayodhya dispute hearing more than once and the arguments were first fixed to be concluded by October 18. That was later advanced to October 17, but on October 16, the bench decided to wrap it all up saying "enough is enough".

The bench was racing against time since the verdict was to be delivered before Justice Gogoi demits office on November 17.

After wrapping up the hearing and reserving the verdict, it had granted three days to contesting parties to file written notes on 'moulding of relief' or narrowing down the issues on which the court is required to adjudicate.

ASI report that guided Ayodhya verdict to be brought out in form of book

The marathon hearing was marked by frequent heated exchanges between the lawyers of the Hindu and the Muslim sides, and midway the issue of settling the dispute through mediation once again cropped up.

The first mediation bid failed to find an amicable resolution leading to the commencement of day-to-day hearing from August 6.

Later, the panel, which comprised F M I Kallifulla, a former Supreme Court judge, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, founder of Art of Living Foundation and Sriram Panchu, an acclaimed mediator, was allowed to continue mediation proceedings. The panel submitted its report to the court on the last date of hearing.

India slams Pak for 'unwarranted’ statement on Ayodhya verdict

Sources had said that the report was like a "sort of a settlement" between the Hindu and the Muslim parties.

They had said the Sunni Waqf Board, Nirvani Akhada, Nirmohi Akhada, Ram Janmabhoomi Punruddhar Samiti and some other Hindu parties were in favour of settling the contentious land dispute.

For Daily Alerts
Get Instant News Updates
Notification Settings X
Time Settings
Clear Notification X
Do you want to clear all the notifications from your inbox?
Settings X