In a last-ditch effort to influence the decision in favour of Babri Masjid in the Ram Janmabhoomi, Ayodhya case, the Muslim parties had submitted a ‘Statement of moulding the relief’ to the Supreme Court. The statement urged the Supreme Court to ‘consider how the future generations will view this judgement’ and asked them to uphold multiculturism in their submission.
However, this ‘Statement of moulding the relief’ was meant to be submitted to the Supreme Court in a sealed cover. As soon as it was submitted, the media widely had a copy of it. The contents of the statement were reported widely by every media house.
Mentioning the matter, the Muslim parties said that they had earlier submitted their note in a sealed cover to the Supreme Court but have now served it in open to all parties.
#AyodhyaCase: Muslim parties mention the matter, say they earlier submitted their note in sealed cover but have now served it in open to all parties.#CJI: It is on my table…in a sealer cover. And it is on the Indian Express front page. Let it be there only..#RamMandir
— Utkarsh Anand (@utkarsh_aanand) October 21, 2019
Chief Justice of India, Ranjan Gogoi, however, was not pleased with the submissions of the Muslim parties.
When the matter was mentioned, CJI Ranjan Gogoi said “It is on my table…in a sealer cover. And it is on the Indian Express front page. Let it be there only”, expressing displeasure at the fact that the submission made to the Supreme Court in a sealed cover was already leaked to the media.
The Muslim parties said in court that they will be filing a reply on the objections raised by the Hindu side in a sealed envelope to the Supreme Court.
Ayodhya case: Muslim parties today mentioned before Supreme Court that they have filed the reply on ‘moulding of relief'(narrowing down arguments & telling court what points a party wants it to adjudicate on)&are filing reply on objections raised by other side,in sealed envelope pic.twitter.com/CyZ3R66y6V
— ANI (@ANI) October 21, 2019
The Supreme Court had given three days to all parties to submit their statements on the moulding of relief to the SC in sealed covers.
The Nirmohi Akhada in its submission outlined 6 possible outcomes of the verdict and gave its opinions on all three. It has said that it is the lead claimant in building the temple since it has the Shebait rights since the 18th century. A shebait under Hindu law is entrusted with the task of maintaining and preserving an idol and its property.
One of the original parties to the suit, Gopal Singh Visharad who is now survived by son Rajendra Singh have submitted that the building of Ram Janmabhoomi is non-negotiable. They have also submitted that a place of worship is not essential to perform Namaz. Further, they have submitted that “only” the “Mutawalli (the trustee of a wakf)” can come forward to stake claim on behalf of the mosque. Since Mutawalli has not staked a claim, the claims of the Sunni Central Waqf Board and other Muslims plaintiffs are not legitimate.
The representatives of Lord Ram have claimed the entire 67.703 acres and not just the 2.77 acres saying that the entire space would be necessary for the devotees when a Ram Temple is built.
The centuries-old Ram Janmabhoomi conflict seems to draw to a close. The Ram Janmabhoomi verdict is expected to be pronounced any day between 14th and 16th November 2019.
