Pakistan’s education minister Shafqat Mahmood at the UNESCO meet criticised the Ayodhya verdict in India and said that it was contrary to the values of religious freedom. Just like the Kashmir issue, this too has rightly got no traction.
When we talk terror, fake currency and a state policy to bleed India, there is one thing in common – Pakistan. The failed state is known to meddle in the affairs of India and despite facing an imminent collapse, Pakistan continues to make India its main policy.
While Pakistan continues to meddle in the affairs of Kashmir, it has now raked up the Ayodhya issue as well. Pakistan’s education minister Shafqat Mahmood at the UNESCO meet criticised the Ayodhya verdict and said that it was contrary to the values of religious freedom. This reckless statement by Pakistan comes at a time when the Muslims of India have called for peace in the aftermath of the verdict and said that they want a closure to this case that has dragged on for centuries.
The Supreme Court delivered its historic verdict on the Ayodhya case on November 9. One of the key concerns was the security situation. The job of ensuring that the nation remained peaceful was entrusted to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.
One of the key concerns ahead of the Ayodhya verdict that was delivered on Saturday was the security situation. Prime Minister Narendra Modi was insistent that there ought to be a closure to this issue and he had even said before the verdict that the judgment should not be seen as a victory or loss to anyone.
Post the verdict too, the PM addressed the nation and compared the scenario to the fall of the Berlin Wall, which acted as a unifying factor. The job of ensuring that the nation remained peaceful was entrusted to National Security Advisor Ajit Doval.
The Supreme Court in the road to its Ayodhya verdict travelled through ages of text that led it to state that the faith of the Hindus in Lord Ram was undisputed.
A verdict that the nation awaited with bated breath was delivered on Saturday. The Supreme Court paved the way for the construction of the Ram Temple, while directing the government to allot five acres of land at an alternate site to the Muslims.
One key observation by the five judge Bench was that the faith of the Hindus in Lord Ram was undisputed. Broadly the Supreme Court said that there is a continuity of faith of the Hindus.
When the court spoke about faith, they speak about the continuity and there is not a single account where the judgment contradicts the same.
New Delhi, Nov 11: While delivering the Ayodhya Verdict, the Supreme Court took on record the service by the mediation panel. The court had set up the panel, but the mediation failed following which the Supreme Court delivered its final verdict in which it held that the disputed land belonged to the Hindus.
The court recorded that the settlement agreement received by it had not been agreed to or signed by all parties. Moreover, it is only conditional on certain stipulations being fulfilled. Hence it cannot be treated to be a binding or concluded agreement between the parties to the disputes, the Bench had held.
New Delhi, Nov 11: In the aftermath of the Ayodhya Verdict, the security of all the five judges has been increased. Sources say taking into consideration the sensitivity of the issue, the security of Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, Justice S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer has been increased.
New Delhi, Nov 10: The report by the Archaeological Survey of India which was relied upon heavily by the Supreme Court in the Ayodhya verdict will come out as a book.
While congratulating the ASI, Union Minister for Culture, Prahlad Patel said that he was grateful to the experts who had worked on the report. He said that the report will brought out in the form of a book.
New Delhi, Nov 09: They have done their job and now it is time for a break. The five judge Bench which delivered the verdict in the Ayodhya Case today will be taking some time off later this evening.
The long battle in Ayodhya since 1528 finally concluded on November 9 as the Supreme Court delivered the verdict granting the disputed site to the Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas
Emotions and passions were high and finally the Supreme Court took into account, archaeology, history, law and religion before it delivered its final verdict in the Ayodhya case.
The final verdict read that the Ram Temple would be built on the disputed site, while the Muslims would get 5 acres of land at an alternate site. This brought an end to a long battle, which began in 1528 when the Babri Masjid was built by Mir Baqi, commander of Mughal emperor Babur.
While the Supreme Court delivered the Ayodhya verdict by giving the disputed land to the Ramjanmabhoomi Nyas, the court also made an interesting observation with regard to the birthplace of Lord Ram
One very key observation that was made by the Supreme Court while delivering the Ayodhya verdict was with regard to the Ram Janmasthan or Ram’s birthplace.
The court said that it is thus concluded that prior to construction of the mosque and subsequent thereto, Janmasthan of Lord Ram is the place where Babri Mosque has been constructed where faith and belief is proved by documentary and oral evidence.
New Delhi, Nov 09: The Supreme Court made some very interesting observations while coming to a conclusion on the title suit in the Ayodhya Verdict.
The facts, evidence and oral arguments of the present case have traversed the realms of history, archaeology, religion and the law. The law must stand apart from political contestations over history, ideology and religion. For a case replete with references to archaeological foundations, we must remember that it is the law which provides the edifice upon which our multicultural society rests, the court observed.