PFI files curative petition in SC challenging Ayodhya verdict

New Delhi, Mar 06: The Popular Front of India has filed a curative petition in the Supreme Court challenging the verdict in the Ayodhya case. The plea has been filed after the Supreme Court had rejected the review petitions filed in connection with this case.

All review petitions seeking a review of the Ayodhya verdict were rejected by a five judge Bench of the Supreme Court.

The new five-judge bench was headed by Chief Justice S.A. Bobde and comprises Justices Ashok Bhushan, S.A. Nazeer, D.Y. Chandrachud and Sanjiv Khanna. Justice Khanna is the new judge on the bench who has replaced retired Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi.

A total of 18 review petitions have been filed in the Supreme Court seeking review of its November 9 judgement.

The Bench rejected the 18 petitions that had sought review of the verdict giving the disputed land to the Ram Temple and five acres at an alternate site to the Sunni Waqf Board. The Bench rejected the reviews of those persons who were party to any of the four titles. The Bench also declined permission to file review petitions to those including Prabhat Patnaik stating that they were not parties to the Ayodhya land dispute.

A 5-judge bench, headed by the then Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, had in a unanimous verdict on November 9 decreed the entire 2.77 acre disputed land in favour of deity 'Ram Lalla' and also directed the Centre to allot a five-acre plot to Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque in Ayodhya.

Curative petition explained:

The concept first came up in the Supreme Court in the Rupa Ashok Hurra vs Ashok Hurra case in 2002. The question that came up was whether an aggrieved person was entitled for relief after a review petition was dismissed.

The court held that to cure gross miscarriage of justice and to prevent abuse of its process, it may reconsider its judgment in exercise of the inherent powers vested with it. For this purpose the Supreme Court said that a curative plea can be filed.

In order to file a curative plea, a petitioner will have to establish that there was a genuine violation of principles of natural justice. The petitioner shall also state that the grounds mentioned in the plea were taken up in the review plea and it had been rejected by circulation.

The petition is then circulated before the Bench that heard the case and also the three senior most judges of the Supreme Court. If the majority of the judges are convinced, then it would be sent to the same Bench that heard the plea. In case it is found that the case lacks merit, then exemplary costs could be imposed.

The Ayodhya verdict in a nutshell:

• Hindus to get land subject to conditions
• Central government to frame a scheme under Article 142
• Trust to be formed
• Centre must set a trust with board of trustees within 3 months
• Inner courtyard will be handed over to the trust
• Suitable plot of land measuring 5 acre shall be given to Sunni Waqf Board either by the state or by the Centre.
• Nirmohi Akhara to also get representation.
• Land to remain vested in statutory receiver till trust is formed
• Management of construction of the temple to be monitored by the trust
• Suit by Shia Waqf Board rejected and suit by Nimrohi Akhara not maintainable