Reactions on Ayodhya verdict
UP Chief Minister Mayawati
"All the parties involved in the case should welcome the verdict and people should maintain peace"
Prominent Historian Irfan Habib
"It is improper to accept ASI report on the historical fact. The ASI report was not based on facts. Weight has been given to belief. The mosque was built by Mr Abdul Baqi and not by Babar. One should be careful in historical facts".
General secretary AIMPLB Maulana Nizamuddin
"The verdict is against us. The order for the division of land could not be implemented. We will challenge in Supreme Court".
UP Central Sunni Waqf Board (main plaintiff) chairman Zufar Ahmad Farooqui
"I will take the issue to waqf board for next course of action".
Shia cleric Maulana Kalbe Jawad
"The verdict is disappointing, will go the Supreme Court".
Former advocate general SMA Kazmi
"I treat this judgment to be a historical event in the history of Indian jurisprudence. For the first time a bench was called up to decide an issue which involved historical perspective, legal complications and interpretation of secular ethos of the country. With legal acumen and judicial pragmatism this judgment has tried to provide an amicable solution to all contesting parties".
Congress president Rita Bahuguna Joshi
"I welcome the High Court verdict on Babri Masjid-Ramjanma Bhoomi case. If any side is dissatisfied then the doors of Supreme Court are open".
BSP MP and Babri Masjid Action Committee member Shafiqur Rahman Barq
"I partly welcome the decision. I am not satisfied over the trifurcation of land, will go Supreme Court"
Former chief minister, Kalyan Singh
"I see two parts of the judgment. The one part of the verdict dismisses the Sunni Waqf Board's petition and says the place where Ram Lala is situated belongs to Ram Lala and his statues cannot be removed from the disputed site. I welcome this part of the ruling. I am not pleased with the second part of the order wherein the court had given one third of disputed land to Sunni Waqf Board. On the one hand the court dismissed the Waqf Board's entire petition, on the other hand it gives it the one-third of the land and this arrangement is contradictory and uncalled-for".
Samajwadi Party spokesman Rajendra Chaudhury"
"No comment today"
BJP MP Yogi Adityanath
"The verdict delivered by three judges is a final stamp over the beliefs of the Hindu community. It's also a slap on the face of the secularist and leftist who had been opposing the movement launched by the Hindus for the construction of the temple. Now they should seek an apology from the nation for creating rift between the two communities. The Muslims believes in harmony and peace. After the High Court judgement they should break the continuing deadlock and pave way for the construction of the temple".
Enter your email to get our daily newsletter in your inbox
- An HT analysis of the profile of snatchers arrested in Delhi between 2018 and 2020 shows that more than 90% of those arrested were caught for the first time, and did not have any criminal record until then. Police registered them as “first-time offenders”.
- A pavement establishment rich in character.
- Additional sessions judge Amitabh Rawat questioned the police’s case as to how the offence of attempt to murder can be made out against accused Imran and Babu, when the victim himself is absent from the police investigation and has never been seen by the police.
- Under section 196 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the investigating agency has to take prior sanction from the state government to prosecute any individual for sedition.
- In a statement issued later, the Delhi government said the funds have been allocated for scholarships to SC/ST/OBC communities, Ladli Scheme, aid and equipment for children with special needs and for augmentation of library infrastructure in Delhi government schools.