The hearing in the Ayodhya case is progressing at the Supreme Court of India..The Ayodhya case is being heard by a Constitution Bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer..Hearings had commenced on August 6, with arguments being made on behalf of the Nirmohi Akhara. In the following hearings, submissions were also made on behalf of the deity Ram Lalla and the Ram Janmabhoomi Punaruddhar Samiti. After arguments on behalf of the Hindu parties to the Ayodhya dispute concluded, arguments have commenced on behalf of the Muslim parties to the case..Below are live updates from today’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:.“Why are you doing this? You are 88-year old”, CJI Gogoi to TN professor who had wrote threatening letter to Rajeev Dhavan for his appearance for the muslim parties in the case. Contemnor expresses regret for his actions.Kapil Sibal says he does not wish to pursue any action against the contemnor. “It should only be a message to the nation” Court disposes of the matter.Rajeev Dhavan reading out testimonies of various witnesseThe entire story of central dome emerges sometime in 19th century. Our contention is this is all an afterthought, Rajeev Dhavan.No plausible evidence of Hindus worshipping central dome, Rajeev Dhavan.Justice Ashok Bhushan disputing it strongly. Justice Ashok Bhushan citing testimony of a prosecution witness who is said to have prayed there. “Not correct to say there is no evidence“, Bhushan J. “I am not twisting the evidence“, Dhavan. “Whatever is there is there“, Justice Ashok Bhushan.Justice Ashok Bhushan says just because the Hindu parties have not referred to that testimony does not mean Court cannot ask questions about it since it is part of High Court judgment.“I notice certain aggression in Your Lordship’s tone”, Dhavan.Justice Chandrachud and CS Vaidyanathan also come to the defence of Justice Bhushan. Rajeev Dhavan apologises.Any conjecture by a witness like this who doesn’t remember anything can hardly be believed. With deepest of respect, this is not evidence, DhavanJanmabhoomi is a post 1980 phenomenon. Janmasthaan and janmabhoomi are used interchangeably. After 1980, janmabhoomi came to be used, Dhavan.Test is not reasonable possibility, but reasonable probability, Dhavan.We are frequently obliged to act on degrees of probability, Dhavan.Dhavan making submissions on evidence, standard of proof and test of probability.One must ensure that conjecture or suspicion is not allowed to take the place of legal proof, DhavanDhavan makes submissions on rights of the Shebait, says worshippers can only file suit to protect their own rights and do not have the right to sue on behalf of the idol.Bench rises for lunch. No post-lunch sitting today..Below are updates from yesterday’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:.Parties hand over time schedule required to complete their arguments. Court after going through the same says it is hopeful to conclude the arguments by October 18. “Let us make a joint effort to conclude the same by Oct 18”, CJI Ranjan Gogoi.Mediation can continue simultaneously, parties free to resort to mediation to settle the dispute, orders Supreme Court.Rajeev Dhavan once again objects to intervention by Subramanian Swamy; Says it will open a flood gate if just one party is allowed to intervene.Bench rises for lunch. Rajeev Dhavan will continue to make submissions post lunch.Bench assembles post lunch. Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan resumes his submissions.Dhavan cites and quotes from the works of writers and travellers gazetteer relied upn to mark the history of AyodhyaJustice Chandrachud asks Dhavan of the distance between the chabutara and the central dome.Justice Chandrachud suggests that the placement of railing just outside the chabutara has some significance saying that perhaps the people praying at the railing believed they were praying to the deity insideAll of them prayed at the chabutara with bhandara next to it. It is conjecture because there is no evidence of the 19th Century except the gazettes and travellers accountsJustice Chandrachud: maybe people prayed at the railing because they believed they had something beyond the railing. Dhavan: we don’t know that. They could go there out of animosity. There was an upsurge in the 1850s.Hearing concludes for the day..Read an account of Day 1 of the arguments here. Accounts of the arguments made on Days 2 and 3 can be read here and here. Arguments made on Day 5 can be read here..Day 6 arguments can be read here and Day 7 arguments can be read here. Day 8 arguments can be read here. Day 9 arguments can be read here. Day 10 arguments can be read here..An account of day 15 arguments can be read here and an account of day 16 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 17 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 21 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 22 arguments may be read here. Day 24 arguments can be read here.Day 25 arguments may be read here.
The hearing in the Ayodhya case is progressing at the Supreme Court of India..The Ayodhya case is being heard by a Constitution Bench of Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi and Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer..Hearings had commenced on August 6, with arguments being made on behalf of the Nirmohi Akhara. In the following hearings, submissions were also made on behalf of the deity Ram Lalla and the Ram Janmabhoomi Punaruddhar Samiti. After arguments on behalf of the Hindu parties to the Ayodhya dispute concluded, arguments have commenced on behalf of the Muslim parties to the case..Below are live updates from today’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:.“Why are you doing this? You are 88-year old”, CJI Gogoi to TN professor who had wrote threatening letter to Rajeev Dhavan for his appearance for the muslim parties in the case. Contemnor expresses regret for his actions.Kapil Sibal says he does not wish to pursue any action against the contemnor. “It should only be a message to the nation” Court disposes of the matter.Rajeev Dhavan reading out testimonies of various witnesseThe entire story of central dome emerges sometime in 19th century. Our contention is this is all an afterthought, Rajeev Dhavan.No plausible evidence of Hindus worshipping central dome, Rajeev Dhavan.Justice Ashok Bhushan disputing it strongly. Justice Ashok Bhushan citing testimony of a prosecution witness who is said to have prayed there. “Not correct to say there is no evidence“, Bhushan J. “I am not twisting the evidence“, Dhavan. “Whatever is there is there“, Justice Ashok Bhushan.Justice Ashok Bhushan says just because the Hindu parties have not referred to that testimony does not mean Court cannot ask questions about it since it is part of High Court judgment.“I notice certain aggression in Your Lordship’s tone”, Dhavan.Justice Chandrachud and CS Vaidyanathan also come to the defence of Justice Bhushan. Rajeev Dhavan apologises.Any conjecture by a witness like this who doesn’t remember anything can hardly be believed. With deepest of respect, this is not evidence, DhavanJanmabhoomi is a post 1980 phenomenon. Janmasthaan and janmabhoomi are used interchangeably. After 1980, janmabhoomi came to be used, Dhavan.Test is not reasonable possibility, but reasonable probability, Dhavan.We are frequently obliged to act on degrees of probability, Dhavan.Dhavan making submissions on evidence, standard of proof and test of probability.One must ensure that conjecture or suspicion is not allowed to take the place of legal proof, DhavanDhavan makes submissions on rights of the Shebait, says worshippers can only file suit to protect their own rights and do not have the right to sue on behalf of the idol.Bench rises for lunch. No post-lunch sitting today..Below are updates from yesterday’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:.Parties hand over time schedule required to complete their arguments. Court after going through the same says it is hopeful to conclude the arguments by October 18. “Let us make a joint effort to conclude the same by Oct 18”, CJI Ranjan Gogoi.Mediation can continue simultaneously, parties free to resort to mediation to settle the dispute, orders Supreme Court.Rajeev Dhavan once again objects to intervention by Subramanian Swamy; Says it will open a flood gate if just one party is allowed to intervene.Bench rises for lunch. Rajeev Dhavan will continue to make submissions post lunch.Bench assembles post lunch. Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan resumes his submissions.Dhavan cites and quotes from the works of writers and travellers gazetteer relied upn to mark the history of AyodhyaJustice Chandrachud asks Dhavan of the distance between the chabutara and the central dome.Justice Chandrachud suggests that the placement of railing just outside the chabutara has some significance saying that perhaps the people praying at the railing believed they were praying to the deity insideAll of them prayed at the chabutara with bhandara next to it. It is conjecture because there is no evidence of the 19th Century except the gazettes and travellers accountsJustice Chandrachud: maybe people prayed at the railing because they believed they had something beyond the railing. Dhavan: we don’t know that. They could go there out of animosity. There was an upsurge in the 1850s.Hearing concludes for the day..Read an account of Day 1 of the arguments here. Accounts of the arguments made on Days 2 and 3 can be read here and here. Arguments made on Day 5 can be read here..Day 6 arguments can be read here and Day 7 arguments can be read here. Day 8 arguments can be read here. Day 9 arguments can be read here. Day 10 arguments can be read here..An account of day 15 arguments can be read here and an account of day 16 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 17 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 21 arguments can be read here. An account of Day 22 arguments may be read here. Day 24 arguments can be read here.Day 25 arguments may be read here.
![Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 26-Day 27]](http://media.assettype.com/barandbench%2Fimport%2F2019%2F08%2FAyodhya-dispute-4-1.jpg?w=480&auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=max)
