Ayodhya case HIGHLIGHTS: VHP accuses Opposition of pulling all stops to defer judgement
Ayodhya case HIGHLIGHTS: Justice UU Lalit, one of the five judges of the Supreme Court constitution bench hearing the Ayodhya case, offered to opt out after a lawyer pointed out that he had represented one of the parties nearly two decades ago.
- 1:50 pm IST
- 1:45 pm IST
- 12:45 pm IST
- 12:40 pm IST
- 12:35 pm IST
- 12:30 pm IST
- 12:25 pm IST
- 12:15 pm IST
- 12:05 pm IST
- 11:55 am IST
- 11:45 am IST
- 11:35 am IST
- 11:30 am IST
- 11:20 am IST
Justice UU Lalit, one of the five judges of the Supreme Court constitution bench hearing the Ayodhya case, offered to opt out after a lawyer pointed out that he had represented one of the parties nearly two decades ago.
The Supreme Court will now hear the Ayodhya case on January 29. A new bench will be constituted before the next hearing. Here are the live updates:
SC to deal with ‘unclear translations’
The Supreme Court also has to deal with ‘unclear translations’. The documents, written in Hindi, Awadhi, Gurmukhi, Persian and Urdu had to be translated into English but the registrar general’s report to the bench said the translation were not clear and parties to the case had raised objections.
New SC bench to go through 30K pages of witness deposition, earlier court orders
The new Supreme Court bench has a daunting task of trawling through reams of evidence, deposition of witnesses and thousands of documents. The judges will be presented with deposition of 88 witnesses, running into 13,886 pages, other than 257 related documents and video tapes. The earlier court orders run into 4,304 printed pages and 8,533 typed pages.
‘Objection about absence of Muslim judge disturbing’: VHP
“Objections by two members of the Muslim Personal Law Board about the absence of any Muslim judge on the bench is disturbing. It would be a very sad day when judges would be assigned to hear matters on the basis of their religion. The attempt of forum shopping is to be condemned,” Alok Kumar, International Working President, VHP, said in a statement.
Court should decide matter without undue delay: VHP
Under the circumstances, an adjournment from January 10 to January 29 is rather long. Hindus are known for their patience and forbearance. The judicial system still has the responsibility of deciding the matters without undue delays. The country hopes the CJI acts decisively to prevent the delaying tactics of the opposite party: Alok Kumar, International Working President, VHP
Justice Lalit never appeared in Ram Janmabhoomi matters: VHP
The other objection on Justice Lalit being on the bench is painful. Justice Lalit has never appeared in the Ram Janmabhoomi matters; neither at the trial stage nor in the appeal. His being Counsel of Kalyan Singh in 1997 in the contempt matter casts no shadow on his hearing the present appeals. The objections were merely ploys to delay further: Alok Kumar, International Working President, VHP
Apprehension about adjournment true: VHP
Our apprehensions that the opposite party shall raise any frivolous issue to secure an adjournment have come true. The objection that a judicial order should have been passed for the constitution of a five-judge bench is apparently frivolous, for it is settled that the CJI is the master of roster: Alok Kumar, International Working President, VHP
Right-wing groups demand executive order for Ram temple
The postponement of hearing had led to demands from several right-wing groups for a law or executive order to facilitate building of a Ram temple at the disputed site. PM Narendra Modi said in a recent interview that his government would wait for the court to rule on the case.
Supreme Court originally supposed to hear case in October
The Supreme Court was originally supposed to hear the case in October, but deferred it to January, rejecting the Uttar Pradesh government’s plea for speedy hearings with CJI Ranjan Gogoi saying the court has its “own priorities”.
Harish Salve supports Rajeev Dhawan
Harish Salve, appearing for a Hindu party, says he supports Rajeev Dhawan. He says the contempt arose for breach of orders passed in a writ petition as then UP CM had failed to maintain status quo at the site.
Contempt proceedings against Kalyan Singh for not maintaining status quo at disputed site
Justice Lalit had appeared in 1997 for Kalyan Singh, then UP chief minister, after contempt proceedings were initiated against him for not maintaining status quo at the disputed site.
Justice Lalit appeared for Kalyan Singh in 1997
Before the court could decide on the next date and schedule, senior lawyer Rajeev Dhawan, who is representing one of the parties, said that in an earlier related case heard in 1997, Justice Lalit had appeared for Kalyan Singh.
Today’s hearing was to fix schedule
Early in the hearing, the CJI said that today’s date was not fixed for hearing but to work out a date and schedule for the hearing.
Supreme Court to hear Ayodhya case on January 29
Supreme Court to hear Ayodhya case on January 29. New bench to be constituted before next hearing.
Justice Lalit opts out of hearing Ayodhya case
Justice UU Lalit, one of the five judges of the Supreme Court constitution bench hearing the Ayodhya case, offers to opt out after a lawyer pointed out that he had represented one of the parties nearly two decades ago.