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..This week, hearings will continue until 5 pm until Thursday..Below are live updates from today’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:.Hearing continues, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan making submissions for Sunni Waqf Board.Rajeev Dhavan will now start his reply to suit no. 1.The case that is made out is that the place is not a mosque after 1934, Rajeev Dhavan.The abandonment of a place and not worshipping at a place are totally different, Rajeev Dhavan.My argument will be that there is no mention of Ram Janmabhoomi temple in Valmiki Ramayana or Ramcharith Manas, Zafaryab Jilani.Bench quizzing Jilani on whether non-mention in texts will be proof of the non-existence of temple.There is no evidence of the place below central dome being a site of worship before 1949, submits Jilani.Only because Valmiki Ramayan and Ramcharith Manas does not mention the precise site in Ayodhya where Ram was born, can’t Hindus believe that Ram was born at a particular place in Ayodhya, asks Justice Chandrachud.Jilani says their case is exact site is at a different place in Ayodhya itself.Justice DY Chandrachud quizzing Jilani regarding the deposition of witness about the birthplace of Lord Ram and its distance from Sita Kumbh.The discussion now on exact Janmasthan and its location west of Sita Kund.Justice SA Bobde says there are three alternatives which Court is considering: (1) Babur built the mosque after destroying the temple. (2) Babur built the temple at the site where a temple stood earlier. (3) Babur built the mosque at a vacant site.Our argument is no. 3 – that Babur built the mosque at a vacant site. Any temple which might have existed there had long disappeared. The land was vacant when the mosque was built, Jilani.This mosque became important only because of this dispute, it was like any other mosque till 19th century, Jilani.Were other mosques built by Governor of Emperor like the Babri Masjid, asks Justice Bobde. Many of them were built by Nawabs etc., says Jilani.Justice SA Bobde says speciality of Ain-i-Akbari is that it mentions minutest of the details, then why does it not mention Babri Masjid?There might perhaps have been too many mosques to mention about all of them. Moreover, its the plaintiff’s case that mosque was built after demolishing temple. If that is incorrect, then dismiss the suit, Jilani.Jilani says no mention of any demolition of Ram temple by Babur though there are vivid accounts of destruction of temples by Mahmud of Ghazni. This is proof that no such destruction ever took place.From the description in Ain-i-Akbari, there was no belief that Hindus worshipped at the spot below the central dome or attached significance to the spot. Else it would have found mention in Ain-i-akbari, Jilani.Justice Ashok Bhushan referring to a witness deposition who refers to a belief of Janmasthan dating back to 6th century work.Is it the case that nobody can ascertain the exact spot where Lord Ram was born, Justice SA Bobde. Thats not my case. My case is that the disputed place is not where he was born, Jilani.Bench rises 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. An account of the arguments that took place on Days 26 and 27 may be read here. Read an account of Day 29 here..Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.
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..This week, hearings will continue until 5 pm until Thursday..Below are live updates from today’s hearing in the Ayodhya case:.Hearing continues, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan making submissions for Sunni Waqf Board.Rajeev Dhavan will now start his reply to suit no. 1.The case that is made out is that the place is not a mosque after 1934, Rajeev Dhavan.The abandonment of a place and not worshipping at a place are totally different, Rajeev Dhavan.My argument will be that there is no mention of Ram Janmabhoomi temple in Valmiki Ramayana or Ramcharith Manas, Zafaryab Jilani.Bench quizzing Jilani on whether non-mention in texts will be proof of the non-existence of temple.There is no evidence of the place below central dome being a site of worship before 1949, submits Jilani.Only because Valmiki Ramayan and Ramcharith Manas does not mention the precise site in Ayodhya where Ram was born, can’t Hindus believe that Ram was born at a particular place in Ayodhya, asks Justice Chandrachud.Jilani says their case is exact site is at a different place in Ayodhya itself.Justice DY Chandrachud quizzing Jilani regarding the deposition of witness about the birthplace of Lord Ram and its distance from Sita Kumbh.The discussion now on exact Janmasthan and its location west of Sita Kund.Justice SA Bobde says there are three alternatives which Court is considering: (1) Babur built the mosque after destroying the temple. (2) Babur built the temple at the site where a temple stood earlier. (3) Babur built the mosque at a vacant site.Our argument is no. 3 – that Babur built the mosque at a vacant site. Any temple which might have existed there had long disappeared. The land was vacant when the mosque was built, Jilani.This mosque became important only because of this dispute, it was like any other mosque till 19th century, Jilani.Were other mosques built by Governor of Emperor like the Babri Masjid, asks Justice Bobde. Many of them were built by Nawabs etc., says Jilani.Justice SA Bobde says speciality of Ain-i-Akbari is that it mentions minutest of the details, then why does it not mention Babri Masjid?There might perhaps have been too many mosques to mention about all of them. Moreover, its the plaintiff’s case that mosque was built after demolishing temple. If that is incorrect, then dismiss the suit, Jilani.Jilani says no mention of any demolition of Ram temple by Babur though there are vivid accounts of destruction of temples by Mahmud of Ghazni. This is proof that no such destruction ever took place.From the description in Ain-i-Akbari, there was no belief that Hindus worshipped at the spot below the central dome or attached significance to the spot. Else it would have found mention in Ain-i-akbari, Jilani.Justice Ashok Bhushan referring to a witness deposition who refers to a belief of Janmasthan dating back to 6th century work.Is it the case that nobody can ascertain the exact spot where Lord Ram was born, Justice SA Bobde. Thats not my case. My case is that the disputed place is not where he was born, Jilani.Bench rises 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. An account of the arguments that took place on Days 26 and 27 may be read here. Read an account of Day 29 here..Bar & Bench is available on WhatsApp. For real-time updates on stories, Click here to subscribe to our WhatsApp.
![Ayodhya Hearing: Live Updates from Supreme Court [Day 30]](http://media.assettype.com/barandbench%2Fimport%2F2019%2F09%2FAyodhya-dispute-22.jpg?w=480&auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=max)
