The top court accepted a plea that only original parties to the Babri Masjid-Ram temple title dispute be heard while interventions of unrelated people be rejected.
According to a report in The Indian Express, the court ruled out sending the entire title suit to a larger bench, and underlined that it can not compel the parties involved in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute to arrive at a settlement.
Following the SC's decision barring Swamy from intervening in the case, the latter argued his case by saying that he had not intervened on his own, instead, he was asked to intervene by the SC itself when he had filed a writ petition seeking protection of his fundamental right to worship Lord Rama at "His birthplace" in Ayodhya. How can we do this in a case like this: "SC on out of court settlement?" The order came while it rejected 32 intervening applications.
The petitions before the judges relate to the 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court in the title suit that had been pending for almost six decades.
'Likely Fatalities' After US Military Helicopter Crashes In Iraq
US Central Command (CENTCOM) has confirmed the fact of the crash and the presence of US military personnel on board the aircraft. The helicopter, which was carrying seven people on board, is believed to have crashed in the Anbar region of Iraq.
The case was being heard by a three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and SA Najeeb. The court had also advanced the hearing date to today as there were some documents which it sought to be translated in English. "Can we say that a mosque is not essential and integral?"
There are a total of 13 petitions filed over the disputed 2.7 acre land in Ayodhya which has been the bone of contention between Hindu and Muslim communities.
The apex court said it will deal with the case as a pure land dispute, an indication that the centuries-old history attached to the case was of no significance to it. They challenge the high court verdict that mandated a three-way division of the disputed 2.77-acre site.
The Counsel appearing for Muslims raised several other relevant questions where the Court has sidelined the demolishing of Mosque by Hindus during the case's pendency, whether such a relief should have been granted to the plaintiffs and whether the court was right in considering evidences prior to 1528 which are religious sculptures and text while ignoring supporting evidences with effect from 1528 until 6 December 1992 and why the act of demolishing was not considered as illegal and tried as vandalism, Asianage reported.
The Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court had ruled in favour of partitioning the land equally among three parties-the Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and "Ram Lalla" (infant Lord Ram), represented by the Hindu Mahasabha.