Find Babri Masjid Verdict Latest News, Videos & Pictures on Babri Masjid Verdict and see latest updates, news, information from Explore more on. 5 days ago It has been decided in the meeting that the verdict of the top court in this case should be accepted by everyone, said Babri masjid litigant Iqbal. Supreme Court verdict on Ayodhya case: A timeline of events from , when Babri Alauddin Khilji was the architect of the Babri Masjid.

Author: Kiran Dougal
Country: Belize
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Art
Published (Last): 6 September 2010
Pages: 54
PDF File Size: 13.7 Mb
ePub File Size: 14.59 Mb
ISBN: 559-2-68978-440-2
Downloads: 79299
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Mull

The Ayodhya dispute is a political, historical and socio-religious debate in India, centred on a plot of land in the city of Ayodhyalocated in Ayodhya DistrictUttar Pradesh. The main issues revolve around access to a site traditionally regarded among Hindus to be the birthplace of the Hindu deity Rama[1] the history and location of the Babri Masjid at the site, and whether a previous Hindu temple was demolished or modified to create the mosque.

The Babri Masjid was destroyed during a political rally which turned into a riot on 6 December A subsequent land title case was lodged in the Allahabad High Courtthe verdict of which was pronounced on 30 September In the landmark hearing, the three judges of The Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2. While the three-judge bench was not unanimous that the disputed structure was constructed after demolition of a temple, it did agree that a temple or a temple structure predated the mosque at the same site.

The Ayodhya debate centres around the land known today as Ram Janmabhoomion which the Babri Mosque was built in In the RamayanaAyodhya is the birthplace of the god-king Ramathe son of Dasharathathe ruler of Ayodhya, and his queen Kausalya. He is worshiped by many Hindus as an Avataror incarnation, of Vishnu.

According to the Garuda Puranaa Hindu religious text, Ayodhya is one of seven sacred sites where Mokshaor a final release from the cycle of death and rebirth, may be obtained. Inthe Mughal king Babur invaded north India, and conquered a substantial part of northern India. One of his generals, Mir Baqi came to Ayodhya in and after reportedly destroying [9] a pre-existing temple of Rama at the site, built a mosque, which has come to be called masjid-i-janmasthan mosque at the birthplace [10] as well as Babri Masjid Babur’s mosque.

After the British took over the State, they put up a railing between the two areas to prevent disputes. In Buddha’s time B. During the Gupta times, either Kumaragupta or Skandagupta made it their capital, after which it came to be called Ayodhya.

Kalidasa wrote Raghuvamsa here, and referred to Gopratara tirtha Guptar Ghatwhere Rama was believed to have entered the waters of Saryu in his ascent to heaven.

According to a local tradition recorded by Francis Buchanan and Alexander CunninghamAyodhya became desolate after Rama’s ascent to heaven and “Vikramaditya” revived it. In RaghuvamsaRama’s son Kusa revived it. Prabhavatiguptathe daughter of Chandragupta IIwas a Rama devotee.

After the Guptas, the capital of North India moved to Kannauj masid Ayodhya fell into relative neglect. It masjiv revived by the Gahadavalascoming to power in the 11th century A. The Gahadavalas were Vaishnavas. They built several Vishnu temples in Ayodhya, five of which survived till Aurangzeb’s reign. Bakker concludes that there might have been a temple at the supposed birth spot of Masmid built by the Gahadavalas. Consequently, Ayodhya’s importance as a pilgrimage centre grew.

In particular, multiple versions of Ayodhya Mahatmya magical powers of Ayodhya prescribed the celebration of Ram Navami the birthday of Rama.

How Supreme Court Verdict Today Will Impact the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Title Suit Case

In modern times, a mosque was located at the supposed birth spot of Rama, which sat on a large mound in the centre of Ayodhya, called the Ramadurg or Ramkot the fort of Rama. The mosque bore an inscription stating that it was built in A. According to an early 20th century text by Maulvi Abdul Ghaffar and the surrounding historical sources examined by historian Harsh Narain[note 2] the young Babur came from Kabul to Awadh Ayodhya in disguise, dressed as a Qalandar Sufi asceticprobably as part of a fact-finding mission.

Here he met the Sufi saints Shah Jalal and Sayyid Musa Ashiqan and took a pledge in return for their blessings for conquering Hindustan. The pledge is not spelled out in the edition of Abdul Ghaffar’s book, but it is made clear that it is in pursuance of this pledge that he got the Babri mosque constructed after conquering Hindustan. The older editions of Abdul Ghaffar’s book contain more detail, which seems to have been excised in the edition.


Lala Sita Ram of Ayodhya, who had access to the older edition inwrote, “The faqirs answered that they would bless him if he promised to build a mosque after demolishing the Janmasthan temple.

Babur accepted the faqirs’ offer and returned to his homeland. The fact that Babur came in the guise of a Qalandar is corroborated in Abdullah’s Tarikh-i Dawudiwhere it is detailed that he met the Sultan Sikandar Lodhi in Delhi in the same disguise. While we have had a mosque bearing an inscription to the effect that it was built on orders of Babur inthere are no other records of the mosque from this period.

The Babarnama Chronicles of Babur does not mention either the mosque or the destruction of a temple.

Ayodhya dispute

Again there was no mention of a mosque in his account. The first known report of a mosque appears in a book Sahifa-I-Chihil Nasaih Bahadur Shahisaid to have been written by a daughter of the emperor Bahadur Shah I — and granddaughter of emperor Aurangzebin the early 18th century.

It mentioned mosques having been constructed after demolishing the “temples of the idolatrous Hindus situated at MathuraBanaras and Awadh etc. The documents of these activities have been preserved in the Kapad-Dwar collection in the City Palace Museum in Jaipur. Nath, who has examined these records, concludes that Jai Singh had acquired the land of Rama Janmasthan in The ownership of the land was vested in the deity.

The hereditary title of the ownership was recognized and enforced by the Mughal State from He also found a letter from a gumastha Trilokchand, datedstating that, while under the Muslim administration people had been prevented from taking a ritual bath in the Saryu river, the establishment of the Jaisinghpura has removed all impediments. The Jesuit priest Joseph Tieffenthalerwho visited Awadh inwrote, “Emperor Aurangzebe got the fortress called Ramcot demolished and got a Muslim temple, with triple domes, constructed at the same place.

Others say that it was constructed by ‘Babor’. Fourteen black stone pillars of 5 span high, which had existed at the site of the fortress, are seen there. Twelve of these pillars now support the interior arcades of the mosque.

The first recorded instances of religious violence in Ayodhya occurred in the s over a nearby mosque at Hanuman Garhi. The Babri mosque was attacked by Hindus in the process. Since then, local Hindu groups made occasional demands that they should have the possession of the site and that they should be allowed to build a temple on the site, all of which were denied by the colonial government.

People were led to believe that the idols had ‘miraculously’ appeared inside the mosque. The date of the event was 22 December Jawaharlal Nehru insisted that the idols should be removed. However, the local official K.

Ayodhya Ram Mandir- Babri Masjid Verdict: Know in four points what today’s ruling means

Nairknown for his Hindu nationalist connections, refused to carry out orders, claiming that it vabri lead to communal riots. The police locked the gates so that the public Hindus as well as Muslims could not enter. However, the idols remained inside and priests were allowed entry to perform daily worship.

So, the mosque had been converted into a de facto temple. The land was declared to be under dispute, and the gates remained locked. Christophe Jaffrelot has called the Gorakhnath wing of Hindu nationalism ‘the other saffron’, which has maintained its existence separately from the mainstream Hindu nationalism of the Sangh Parivar.

After the Vishva Hindu Parishad was formed in and started agitating for the Babri Babru site, the two strands of ‘saffron politics’ came together.

In the s, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad VHPbelonging to the mainstream Hindu nationalist family Sangh Parivarlaunched a new movement to “reclaim” the site for Hindus and to erect a temple dedicated to the infant Rama Ramlala at this spot. Ina district judge ruled that the gates would be reopened and Hindus permitted to worship inside, providing a major boost to the movement. Advani began a ” rath yatra ” pilgrimage procession to Ayodhya in order to generate support for the movement.


Advani later stated in his memoirs, “If Muslims are entitled to an Islamic atmosphere in Meccaand if Christians are entitled to a Christian masjie in the Verdixtwhy is it wrong for the Hindus to expect a Hindu atmosphere in Ayodhya? In spite of this, a large number masjd ‘ kar sevaks ‘ or Sangh Parivar activists reached Ayodhya and tried to attack the mosque. They were stopped by the Uttar Pradesh police and the paramilitary forces, resulting in a pitched battle in which several babi sevaks were killed.

Accusing the central government led by V. Singh of being weak, the BJP withdrew its support, necessitating fresh elections. A police cordon abbri there to protect the mosque was heavily outnumbered.

The mosque was attacked with a number of improvised tools, and brought to the ground in a few hours. On 16 Decemberthe Liberhan Commission was set up by the Government of India to probe the circumstances that led to the demolition of the Babri Mosque.

Relying on the testimonies of several eyewitnesses, the report stated that many of these leaders had made provocative speeches at the rally that provoked the demolition. It also stated that they could have stopped the demolition if they had so wished.

Many Muslim organisations have continued to express outrage at the destruction of the disputed structure. In Julyterrorists attacked the makeshift temple at the site of the destroyed mosque. Gopal Das, the then head of the Ram temple, received phone calls making threats against his life. Several later mosques were built in Faizabad district, in which the pilgrim city of Ayodhya falls.

Sinceby Indian Government order, Muslims were not permitted to be closer than yards away to the site; the main gate remained locked, though Hindu pilgrims were allowed to enter through a side door. The Allahabad High Court ordered the opening of the main gate and restored majsid site in full to the Hindus. Bbri groups later requested modifications to the Babri Mosque, and drew up plans for a new grand Temple with Government permissions; riots between Hindu and Muslim groups took place as a result.

Since then, the matter is sub-judice and this political, historical and socio-religious debate over the history and location of the Babri Mosque, is known as the Ayodhya dispute. Archaeological excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India ASI inand in and around the disputed site have found evidence indicating that a large Hindu complex existed on the site.

Before the archaeological opinion was published, there were some differing viewpoints. Although chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti lists as many as fifty-two places of pilgrimage, including towns, lakes, rivers, mountains, etc. This suggests that there was no significant Hindu temple at the site of the Babri Mosque, or that it had ceased to be one, after the mosque was built.

Athar Ali and Dwijendra Narayan Jha wrote the Historians’ report to the nationsaying that the assumption that there was a temple at the disputed site was mistaken, and that there was no valid reason to destroy the mosque. Ratnagar and Jaya Menon. The witnesses withered under scrutiny and were discovered to have made “reckless and irresponsible kind of statements”.

He also pointed out that the independent witnesses were all connected, while adding that their opinions were offered without making a proper investigation, research or study into the subject.

InGopal Singh Visharad filed a title suit with the Allahabad High Court seeking injunction to offer ‘puja’ worship at the disputed site. A similar suit was filed shortly after but later withdrawn by Paramhans Das of Ayodhya. A fourth suit was filed by the Muslim Central Board of Wakf for declaration and possession of the site.

The Allahabad high court bench began hearing the case inwhich was completed in However, the bench withheld masjir verdict till 24 September.

After the Supreme Court dismissed a plea to defer the High Court verdict, the High Court set 30 September as the final date for pronouncing the judgement. Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D.

Author: admin