5-Judge Constitution Bench Of Supreme Court Begins Hearing On Ayodhya
LUCKNOW: A five-judge Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, has begun the hearing to decide the dates for the Ayodha temple-mosque case. It is expected to take a call on the frequency of hearings in the case. The four other judges on the Constitution Bench are Justice SA Bobde, Justice NV Ramana, Justice UU Lalit and Justice DY Chandrachud.
The decision on the title suit, pending for six decades and at the heart of India's most politically divisive row, comes amid demands to speed up the plan to build a Ram temple at the site where the 16th-century Babri mosque stood before it was razed by Hindu right-wing activists in 1992.
Some of its allies of the BJP and right-wing groups want a special executive order or ordinance to enable the start of construction before the general elections are announced. Last year, the Supreme Court refused an early hearing in the case. If the Supreme Court, however, decides today on daily or frequent hearings in the case, it will be seen as a shot in the arm for those demanding a resolution to the issue before the Lok Sabha polls.
For the BJP, early hearing in the case would mean good news politically. In the last two years that the party has been in power in Uttar Pradesh, Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath, a Hindu priest as well, has made Ayodhya a showcase when it comes to development and tourism projects. Part of the plan is to build a massive Ram statue in the temple town that will be the world's tallest. The BJP hopes these moves will attract votes in the general elections, especially from those among the majority Hindus who believe that a Ram temple should be constructed in Ayodhya at the earliest.
In an interview to news agency ANI at the start of the year, Prime Minister Narendra Modi made it clear that any decision on passing an executive order on the Ram temple issue cannot be made unless the judicial process is over.
"Let the judicial process be over. After the judicial process is over, whatever will be our responsibility as the government, we are ready to make all efforts... We have said in our BJP manifesto that a solution would be found to this issue under the ambit of the Constitution," PM Modi had said.
Muslim stakeholders in the case say an early resolution is what they want too. "We welcome the five-judge bench constituted by Supreme Court. Every citizen of the country is expecting the court to hear the matter for its final verdict. We expect this issue will be settled as soon as possible," said Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahali, a prominent Muslim cleric in Lucknow.
The dispute in Ayodhya is over 2.7 acres of land on which the Babri Masjid stood before it was demolished on December 6, 1992. In 2010, the Allahabad High Court allotted two-thirds of the land to the Hindus and one third to the Sunni Waqf Board. Both Hindu and Muslim organisations appealed against it in the Supreme Court, which in 2011, stayed the High Court order.
In October, the Supreme Court rejected the Uttar Pradesh government's appeal for an early hearing of the 14 petitions in the case. "We have our own priorities. Whether hearing would take place in January, March or April would be decided by an appropriate bench," the court said.
courtesy: ndtv.com
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Tharoor junks Rijiju's claim that he agreed Cong is 'anti-women'; hails his party
New Delhi (PTI): Congress MP Shashi Tharoor on Tuesday debunked Union minister Kiren Rijiju's reported claim that the opposition party leader had agreed that the Congress is "anti-women", asserting that at no point did he imply any such thing and that his party has stood for women's rights and reservation.
Reacting to Rijiju's claims, Tharoor stressed that the Congress is totally in favour of women's reservation and prepared to have it implemented right now -- without linking it to delimitation.
In a post on X, the Congress leader said, "I am sorry, but with the greatest respect for Kiren Rijiju, at no point did I say or imply any such thing -- and I have seven witnesses in the photograph who can confirm that!"
"'That was what he meant', our Minister says. No, sir, that is NOT what I meant. 'That Congress can be anti-women...he agreed in a way,' he added. I am sorry but I did NOT agree in any way," Tharoor said.
"The Congress has stood for women's rights and women's reservation under a strong woman president in Sonia Gandhi, initiated the Women's Reservation Bill, passed it in the Rajya Sabha during our tenure and supported it in the Lok Sabha when it was brought by government of India in 2023," he said.
"We are totally in favour of women's reservation and are prepared to have it implemented right now -- without linking it to delimitation," the Thiruvananthapuram MP added.
Rijiju's reported comments came while narrating details of the conversation he had with Tharoor on April 18 after the end of the three-day special sitting of Parliament during which the Constitution (131st Amendment) Bill to implement 33 per cent reservation for women in legislatures in 2029 and increase the number of Lok Sabha seats to 816 was defeated in the Lok Sabha.
Tharoor on April 18 had shared a snippet of his conversation with Parliamentary Affairs Minister Rijiju after the Lok Sabha was adjourned sine die, and said the BJP leader conceded that “no one could ever call me anti-women”.
Tharoor had said women are by far the better half of the species - 'Humans 2.0' - and deserve representation in Parliament and in every institution.
"Just don’t link their advancement to a mischievous and potentially dangerous Delimitation that could devastate our democracy," he had said on X.
Sharing a picture of some opposition MPs standing with Rijiju in the Lok Sabha, Tharoor had said, "A little post-adjournment gathering of Opposition MPs in the Lok Sabha with our charming Parliamentary Affairs Minister.
"When Kiren Rijiju explained why he and his party were calling the Opposition 'mahila virodhi', it was pointed out to him that no one could ever call me anti-women! He conceded the point…"
While 298 members voted in support of the Bill, 230 MPs voted against it. Out of 528 members who voted, the Bill required 352 votes for a two-thirds majority.
The Bill proposed to increase the number of Lok Sabha seats to 816 from the current 543 to "operationalise" the women's reservation law before the 2029 parliamentary polls, following a delimitation exercise based on the 2011 Census.
Seats were also to be increased in state and UT assemblies to accommodate 33 per cent reservation for women.
The three-day special sitting was convened from April 16 to 18 to secure Parliament's approval for the Bill.
After the bill was defeated, the Congress had said the "nefarious attempt" of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Home Minister Amit Shah to link their "dangerous delimitation proposals" to women's reservation had been decisively defeated in the Lok Sabha, calling it a win for democracy and the Constitution.
I am sorry, but with the greatest respect for @KirenRijiju, at no point did I say or imply any such thing -- and I have seven witnesses in the photograph who can confirm that!
— Shashi Tharoor (@ShashiTharoor) April 28, 2026
"That was what he meant", our Minister says. No, sir, that is NOT what I meant. "That Congress can be… https://t.co/hkUsYgOY7a
