<p>The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to refer the <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sc-verdict-babri-masjid-ram-mandir-today-timeline-key-events-167874">Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir</a> matter to a larger bench.&nbsp;</p>

<p>In its verdict, the court said that all temples, mosques and churches are equally relevant.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The verdict came on a batch of pleas by Muslim groups on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute seeking reconsideration by a larger bench on the observations made by it in a 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Justice Bhushan penned down the judgment on behalf of himself and CJI Misra, Justice Nazeer drafted a separate judgment.</p>

<p>Justice Bhushan and CJI Misra in their majority judgment said that the observations in the 1994 verdict won't affect the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute.&nbsp;</p>

<p>"Observations in Ismail Faruqui case on mosques is not essential in the context of the acquisition of mosque and made with respect to the facts of that case," Justice Bhushan said.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The apex court said now the civil suit on land dispute will be heard by a newly constituted three-judge bench from&nbsp;October 29 as Justice Misra will retire on October 2 as the CJI, according to ANI.</p>

<p>A three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer had taken up the long-pending Ayodhya land title appeals against the Allahabad High Court judgment of 2010, which had ordered a three-way partition of the disputed land.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Supreme Court has been hearing the pleas against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement, which had passed an order to divide the disputed land into three portions.</p>

<p>Earlier, CJI Dipak Misra had said that the appeals would be treated as purely a civil suit consisting of a land dispute and religion would not play any role in the verdict, however, during the hearings, Muslim petitioners argued that Constitution bench should first rule on the importance of mosque in Islam.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<p><strong>1994 Ismail Faruqui verdict</strong></p>

<p>In 1994, a five-judge Constitution Bench, hearing the M Ismail Faruqui vs Union of India case, had held that a mosque was not an “essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam” and hence “its acquisition (by the state) is not prohibited by the provisions in the Constitution of India”. This issue has now come up during the hearing of the Ayodhya title suit.</p>

<p>Every immovable property is liable to be acquired.&nbsp;</p>

<p>While offer of prayer or worship is a religious practice, it's offering at every location where such prayers can be offered would not be an essential or integral part of such religious practice unless the place has a particular significance for that religion so as to form an essential or integral part thereof.</p>

<p>Which means that the SC adjudged that offering namaz at a mosque was not integral to Islam unless that mosque had any particular significance in Islam.</p>


The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to refer the Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir matter to a larger bench. In its verdict, the court said that all temples, mosques and churches are equally relevant.

The Supreme Court on Thursday declined to refer the Babri Masjid-Ram Mandir matter to a larger bench. In its verdict, the court said that all temples, mosques and churches are equally relevant. The verdict came on a batch of pleas by Muslim groups on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute seeking reconsideration by a larger bench on the observations made by it in a 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam. Justice Bhushan penned down the judgment on behalf of himself and CJI Misra, Justice Nazeer drafted a separate judgment. Justice Bhushan and CJI Misra in their majority judgment said that the observations in the 1994 verdict won't affect the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute. "Observations in Ismail Faruqui case on mosques is not essential in the context of the acquisition of mosque and made with respect to the facts of that case," Justice Bhushan said. The apex court said now the civil suit on land dispute will be heard by a newly constituted three-judge bench from October 29 as Justice Misra will retire on October 2 as the CJI, according to ANI. A three-judge bench of Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer had taken up the long-pending Ayodhya land title appeals against the Allahabad High Court judgment of 2010, which had ordered a three-way partition of the disputed land. The Supreme Court has been hearing the pleas against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement, which had passed an order to divide the disputed land into three portions. Earlier, CJI Dipak Misra had said that the appeals would be treated as purely a civil suit consisting of a land dispute and religion would not play any role in the verdict, however, during the hearings, Muslim petitioners argued that Constitution bench should first rule on the importance of mosque in Islam. 1994 Ismail Faruqui verdict In 1994, a five-judge Constitution Bench, hearing the M Ismail Faruqui vs Union of India case, had held that a mosque was not an “essential part of the practice of the religion of Islam” and hence “its acquisition (by the state) is not prohibited by the provisions in the Constitution of India”. This issue has now come up during the hearing of the Ayodhya title suit. Every immovable property is liable to be acquired. While offer of prayer or worship is a religious practice, it's offering at every location where such prayers can be offered would not be an essential or integral part of such religious practice unless the place has a particular significance for that religion so as to form an essential or integral part thereof. Which means that the SC adjudged that offering namaz at a mosque was not integral to Islam unless that mosque had any particular significance in Islam.

Ayodhya verdict: SC declines to refer 1994 judgement to larger bench

<p>The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce its verdict Thursday on a batch of pleas by Muslim groups on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute seeking reconsideration by a larger bench, the observations made by it in a 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam.</p>

<p>A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer will pronounce the verdict.&nbsp;</p>

<p>M Siddiq, one of the original litigants of the Ayodhya case who has died and is being represented through his legal heir, had assailed certain findings of the 1994 verdict in the case of M Ismail Faruqui holding that a mosque was not integral to the prayers offered by the followers of Islam.</p>

<p>It was argued by the Muslim groups before a special bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer that the "sweeping" observation of the apex court in the verdict needed to be reconsidered by a five-judge bench as "it had and will have a bearing" on the Babri Masjid-Ram Temple land dispute case.</p>

<p>Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for legal representative of Siddiq, had said that the observation that mosques were not essential for practising Islam were made by the apex court without any enquiry or considering the religious texts.</p>

<p>The Uttar Pradesh government had earlier told the top court that some Muslim groups were trying to delay the hearing in the "long-pending" Ayodhya temple-mosque land dispute case by seeking reconsideration of the observation in the 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam.</p>

<p>Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the UP government, had said this dispute has been awaiting final adjudication for "almost a century".</p>

<p>He had also said that the issue of the observation was neither taken up by any litigant since 1994, nor in the present appeals which were filed in 2010 after the high court's verdict.</p>

<p>The state government had said the law decided by the top court in the Ismail Farooqi case was "the correct law which does not deserve to be disturbed either by referring it as belatedly prayed for or otherwise".</p>

<p>Earlier, Hindu groups had opposed the plea of their Muslim counterparts that the 1994 verdict holding that a mosque was not integral to the prayers offered by the followers of Islam be referred to a larger bench.</p>

<p>The observations were made in the land acquisition matter pertaining to the Ayodhya site and the apex court had to consider two aspects as to whether a mosque could be acquired at all and whether a religious place of worship like a mosque, church or temple was immune from acquisition if it was a place of special significance for that religion and formed its essential and integral part.</p>

<p>The special bench of the apex court is seized of a total of 14 appeals filed against the high court judgement delivered in four civil suits.</p>

<p>A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had in 2010 ordered that the land be partitioned equally among three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.&nbsp;</p>


The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce its verdict Thursday on a batch of pleas by Muslim groups on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute seeking reconsideration by a larger bench, the observations made by it in a 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam.

The Supreme Court is likely to pronounce its verdict Thursday on a batch of pleas by Muslim groups on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute seeking reconsideration by a larger bench, the observations made by it in a 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam. A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer will pronounce the verdict. M Siddiq, one of the original litigants of the Ayodhya case who has died and is being represented through his legal heir, had assailed certain findings of the 1994 verdict in the case of M Ismail Faruqui holding that a mosque was not integral to the prayers offered by the followers of Islam. It was argued by the Muslim groups before a special bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer that the "sweeping" observation of the apex court in the verdict needed to be reconsidered by a five-judge bench as "it had and will have a bearing" on the Babri Masjid-Ram Temple land dispute case. Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for legal representative of Siddiq, had said that the observation that mosques were not essential for practising Islam were made by the apex court without any enquiry or considering the religious texts. The Uttar Pradesh government had earlier told the top court that some Muslim groups were trying to delay the hearing in the "long-pending" Ayodhya temple-mosque land dispute case by seeking reconsideration of the observation in the 1994 verdict that a mosque was not integral to Islam. Additional Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the UP government, had said this dispute has been awaiting final adjudication for "almost a century". He had also said that the issue of the observation was neither taken up by any litigant since 1994, nor in the present appeals which were filed in 2010 after the high court's verdict. The state government had said the law decided by the top court in the Ismail Farooqi case was "the correct law which does not deserve to be disturbed either by referring it as belatedly prayed for or otherwise". Earlier, Hindu groups had opposed the plea of their Muslim counterparts that the 1994 verdict holding that a mosque was not integral to the prayers offered by the followers of Islam be referred to a larger bench. The observations were made in the land acquisition matter pertaining to the Ayodhya site and the apex court had to consider two aspects as to whether a mosque could be acquired at all and whether a religious place of worship like a mosque, church or temple was immune from acquisition if it was a place of special significance for that religion and formed its essential and integral part. The special bench of the apex court is seized of a total of 14 appeals filed against the high court judgement delivered in four civil suits. A three-judge bench of the Allahabad High Court, in a 2:1 majority ruling, had in 2010 ordered that the land be partitioned equally among three parties -- the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

SC verdict today on plea for hearing by larger bench on whether mosques are integral to Islam

<p>A petitioner who sought that the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri masjid site at Ayodhya be declared a national heritage was today asked by the Delhi High Court to file a representation in this regard before the Centre.</p>

<p>A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar did not issue notice on the PIL and instead asked petitioner advocate Anu Mehta to make a representation before the Union Ministry of Culture in this regard.</p>

<p>The bench said that the Centre may consider the representation and take a decision within three months.&nbsp</p>

<p>The PIL has sought a direction to the government to notify and acquire the disputed site and the monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act and declare it as the national heritage.</p>

<p>It further sought a direction to the Centre to preserve and protect the site, take necessary action "to preserve the monuments -- the ancient temple as well as the mosque -- independently".</p>

<p>"If there was a requirement to separate the superstructure from the original structure, i.E., the entire monument at the site, the sanctity of both monuments should be maintained," the plea said.</p>

<p>It said that the disputed site was of archaeological importance and had "ancient monuments, antique artefacts and antiques which constitute our national heritage".</p>

<p>"As per the Act, duty is cast upon the State to preserve ancient monuments and sites and accordingly the said site/monument ought to be accorded place and status of national importance, acquired from private owners and preserved by the state for sake of historical and cultural preservation of the country," the plea said.</p>


A petitioner who sought that the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri masjid site at Ayodhya be declared a national heritage was today asked by the Delhi High Court to file a representation in this regard before the Centre

A petitioner who sought that the disputed Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri masjid site at Ayodhya be declared a national heritage was today asked by the Delhi High Court to file a representation in this regard before the Centre. A bench comprising Acting Chief Justice Gita Mittal and Justice C Hari Shankar did not issue notice on the PIL and instead asked petitioner advocate Anu Mehta to make a representation before the Union Ministry of Culture in this regard. The bench said that the Centre may consider the representation and take a decision within three months. The PIL has sought a direction to the government to notify and acquire the disputed site and the monument under the Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites and Remains Act and declare it as the national heritage. It further sought a direction to the Centre to preserve and protect the site, take necessary action "to preserve the monuments -- the ancient temple as well as the mosque -- independently". "If there was a requirement to separate the superstructure from the original structure, i.E., the entire monument at the site, the sanctity of both monuments should be maintained," the plea said. It said that the disputed site was of archaeological importance and had "ancient monuments, antique artefacts and antiques which constitute our national heritage". "As per the Act, duty is cast upon the State to preserve ancient monuments and sites and accordingly the said site/monument ought to be accorded place and status of national importance, acquired from private owners and preserved by the state for sake of historical and cultural preservation of the country," the plea said.

Plea for declaration of disputed area in Ayodhya as national heritage

<p>The Supreme Court will continue to hear the final arguments in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case on Friday.</p>

<p>The court will hear 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court in four civil suits.</p>

<p>The petitions challenge the high court verdict that mandated a three-way division of the disputed 2.77-acre site in Ayodhya.</p>

<p>The court earlier dismissed all 32 intervention petitions, including applications of Shyam Benegal, Aparna Sen and Teesta Setalvad, in the dispute case.</p>

<p>A Bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer had also directed the registry not to entertain any intervention application in the Ayodhya case.</p>

<p>The Supreme Court also rejected the intervention plea of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy in the dispute, a century-old point of the tussle between Hindus and Muslims.</p>

<p>The Babri Masjid, built by Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya in 1528, was on December 6, 1992, demolished by Hindu Karsevaks in Ayodhya, following which 2000 people were killed in massive riots in Uttar Pradesh.</p>

<p>The Hindus, however, claim that a Ram temple that originally stood there was demolished to construct the mosque.&nbsp;</p>


The court will hear 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court in four civil suits

The Supreme Court will continue to hear the final arguments in the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case on Friday. The court will hear 13 appeals filed against the 2010 judgment of the Allahabad High Court in four civil suits. The petitions challenge the high court verdict that mandated a three-way division of the disputed 2.77-acre site in Ayodhya. The court earlier dismissed all 32 intervention petitions, including applications of Shyam Benegal, Aparna Sen and Teesta Setalvad, in the dispute case. A Bench comprising Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and Abdul Nazeer had also directed the registry not to entertain any intervention application in the Ayodhya case. The Supreme Court also rejected the intervention plea of Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Subramanian Swamy in the dispute, a century-old point of the tussle between Hindus and Muslims. The Babri Masjid, built by Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya in 1528, was on December 6, 1992, demolished by Hindu Karsevaks in Ayodhya, following which 2000 people were killed in massive riots in Uttar Pradesh. The Hindus, however, claim that a Ram temple that originally stood there was demolished to construct the mosque.

Babri Masjid case: Supreme Court to continue 'final hearing' today

<p>Spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has been trying for a solution to the Ayodhya issue through mediation, said on Thursday he has no &quot;ready-made&quot; formula to resolve the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, but is confident that a solution can be found through talks.</p>

<p>The Art of Living Founder claimed that Ramchandraji Maharaj of Nirmohi Akhada -- one of the parties to the Ayodhya dispute -- had requested him to intervene in the matter.</p>

<p>After attending a programme in Maharashtra, Ravi Shankar said that he had stopped his efforts to mediate in the dispute in 2002 as a lot of leaders took interest in resolving the matter, but recently leaders from both sides approached him and requested him to take a new initiative.</p>

<p>&quot;Muslim religious leaders (who met me) also opined that Islam doesn&#39;t approve of prayers being offered at a disputed land. A solution is possible through a dialogue between the two parties,&quot; he said, adding, &quot;But some elements want the dispute to go on for their selfish motives.&quot;</p>

<p>&quot;I do not have any ready-made formula,&quot; the spiritual leader said, adding that he believed that a solution will come through dialogue.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


The Art of Living Founder claimed that Ramchandraji Maharaj of Nirmohi Akhada -- one of the parties to the Ayodhya dispute -- had requested him to intervene in the matter

Spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has been trying for a solution to the Ayodhya issue through mediation, said on Thursday he has no "ready-made" formula to resolve the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi dispute, but is confident that a solution can be found through talks. The Art of Living Founder claimed that Ramchandraji Maharaj of Nirmohi Akhada -- one of the parties to the Ayodhya dispute -- had requested him to intervene in the matter. After attending a programme in Maharashtra, Ravi Shankar said that he had stopped his efforts to mediate in the dispute in 2002 as a lot of leaders took interest in resolving the matter, but recently leaders from both sides approached him and requested him to take a new initiative. "Muslim religious leaders (who met me) also opined that Islam doesn't approve of prayers being offered at a disputed land. A solution is possible through a dialogue between the two parties," he said, adding, "But some elements want the dispute to go on for their selfish motives." "I do not have any ready-made formula," the spiritual leader said, adding that he believed that a solution will come through dialogue.

No formula yet, but talks will resolve Ayodhya dispute: Sri Sri Ravi Shankar

<p>&nbsp;Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has been trying hard to resolve the Ayodhya Babri dispute outside the Supreme Court has said on Monday that situations like Syria should not arise in the country.</p>

<p>According to media reports, the spiritual leader said that&nbsp;Ayodhya is not the religious place of Muslim community and therefore they should not stake claim over it.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He also added that Islam never allows the building of a mosque on a conflicted land.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said&nbsp;that the issue will not be resolved even after the Supreme court delivers its&nbsp;verdict, as no group will&nbsp;be ready to accept its loss.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The founder of &quot;Art of Living&quot;&nbsp;has been involved in solving the disputed Ram Mandir and Ayodhya issue since the past one year. The spiritual guru personally met with over 500 leaders in Ayodhya, Bangalore,&nbsp;&nbsp;Lucknow, Delhi, Hyderabad and Chennai.</p>

<p>The leader also met with the member of the AIMPLB Salman Nadvi.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Ravi Shankar&nbsp;had said earlier that there&nbsp;was a good cooperation in resolving the Ayodhya case from the Muslim community of the country.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="hi">Is desh ke bhavishya ko aise chand log jo sangarsh par hi apna astitva samajhte hain, unke hawale mat kariye. Yahan shanti rehne dijiye. Hamare desh ko Syria jaise nahi banana chahiye. Aisi harkat yahan ho jaaye to satyanash ho jaayega: Sri Sri Ravishankar <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> <a href="https://t.co/kTrsbbXt54">pic.twitter.com/kTrsbbXt54</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/970566992192327680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 5, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p><br />
&nbsp;</p>

<p>.</p>


Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has been trying hard to resolve the Ayodhya Babri dispute outside the Supreme Court has said on Monday that situations like Syria should not arise in the country

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, who has been trying hard to resolve the Ayodhya Babri dispute outside the Supreme Court has said on Monday that situations like Syria should not arise in the country. According to media reports, the spiritual leader said that Ayodhya is not the religious place of Muslim community and therefore they should not stake claim over it. He also added that Islam never allows the building of a mosque on a conflicted land. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said that the issue will not be resolved even after the Supreme court delivers its verdict, as no group will be ready to accept its loss. The founder of "Art of Living" has been involved in solving the disputed Ram Mandir and Ayodhya issue since the past one year. The spiritual guru personally met with over 500 leaders in Ayodhya, Bangalore, Lucknow, Delhi, Hyderabad and Chennai. The leader also met with the member of the AIMPLB Salman Nadvi. Ravi Shankar had said earlier that there was a good cooperation in resolving the Ayodhya case from the Muslim community of the country. Is desh ke bhavishya ko aise chand log jo sangarsh par hi apna astitva samajhte hain, unke hawale mat kariye. Yahan shanti rehne dijiye. Hamare desh ko Syria jaise nahi banana chahiye. Aisi harkat yahan ho jaaye to satyanash ho jaayega: Sri Sri Ravishankar #Ayodhya pic.twitter.com/kTrsbbXt54 — ANI (@ANI) March 5, 2018 × .

Our country should not become like Syria: Sri Sri Ravi Shankar

<p>Babri Masjid will remain a mosque till eternity and Muslims can never exchange land for the masjid, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said here today.</p>

<p>In a statement issued on the concluding day of its 26th plenary, the board said Babri masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never &quot;abdicate&quot; the Masjid.</p>

<p>&quot;Babri Masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never abdicate the Masjid nor can they exchange land for Masjid or gift the Masjid land. Babri Masjid is a Masjid and it shall remain a Masjid till eternity. By demolishing Babri Masjid, it never loses its identity as a masjid. And according to Shariah, it always remains a Masjid,&quot; the statement said.</p>

<p>AIMPLB chief Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadvi presided over the three-day meet which was attended by 400 members and special invitees from different spheres of life including ulemas (clergy), intellectuals, social and political personalities.</p>

<p>Also read:<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/aimplb-expells-cleric-for-suggesting-shifting-babri-mosque-32508">&nbsp;&#39;Hardliners&#39; hijacked board, forced me to distance from &#39;official&#39; stance: Nadvi after expulsion</a></p>

<p>The meet discussed and decided to protect the Islamic Shariah.</p>

<p>The board stressed the struggle for the reconstruction of the Babri Masjid would continue.</p>

<p>&quot;Without any doubt, we make it clear that the struggle for the reconstruction of Babri Masjid continues and the appeal in the Supreme Court is being fought rigorously with all the resources available at the disposal of the board,&quot;?the statement said.</p>

<p>The AIMPLB further said the country&#39;s topmost lawyers are appearing in the apex court in the case on behalf of Muslims.</p>

<p>On the triple talaq issue, the board said a bill moved by the Centre to criminalise the practice is &quot;anti-women&quot; and is against the Shariah and the Constitution.</p>

<p>&quot;The Talaq-e-Biddat bill moved by the central government is anti-women. It will create more difficulties for women. It is against Shariah and it is against the Constitution. The efforts made by the Board will continue to stop this bill in the Rajya Sabha,&quot; the statement said.</p>

<p>The AIMPLB will start a country-wide awareness campaign against the bill and will also coordinate with Opposition parties that are against the bill,?it said.</p>

<p>The AIMPLB also decided that state-wide committees and district-level committees will be formed under the aegis of the central body for the purpose.</p>

<p>The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, which criminalises instant talaq and provides for up to three years of imprisonment for Muslim men if they indulge in it, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha, but it is yet to get a nod in the Rajya Sabha, where the BJP-led NDA lacks majority.</p>

<p>In the politically sensitive Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid case, the Supreme Court is currently hearing final arguments.</p>

<p>In its ruling on September 30, 2010, the Allahabad High Court ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi site, giving a third each to the Nirmohi Akhara, the Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh, and Ramlalla Virajman, the idol of the child Ram placed there.&nbsp;</p>


'Babri Masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never abdicate the Masjid nor can they exchange land for Masjid or gift the Masjid land. Babri Masjid is a Masjid and it shall remain a Masjid till eternity,' the AIMPLB said

Babri Masjid will remain a mosque till eternity and Muslims can never exchange land for the masjid, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said here today. In a statement issued on the concluding day of its 26th plenary, the board said Babri masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never "abdicate" the Masjid. "Babri Masjid is an essential part of faith in Islam and Muslims can never abdicate the Masjid nor can they exchange land for Masjid or gift the Masjid land. Babri Masjid is a Masjid and it shall remain a Masjid till eternity. By demolishing Babri Masjid, it never loses its identity as a masjid. And according to Shariah, it always remains a Masjid," the statement said. AIMPLB chief Maulana Rabey Hasani Nadvi presided over the three-day meet which was attended by 400 members and special invitees from different spheres of life including ulemas (clergy), intellectuals, social and political personalities. Also read: 'Hardliners' hijacked board, forced me to distance from 'official' stance: Nadvi after expulsion The meet discussed and decided to protect the Islamic Shariah. The board stressed the struggle for the reconstruction of the Babri Masjid would continue. "Without any doubt, we make it clear that the struggle for the reconstruction of Babri Masjid continues and the appeal in the Supreme Court is being fought rigorously with all the resources available at the disposal of the board,"?the statement said. The AIMPLB further said the country's topmost lawyers are appearing in the apex court in the case on behalf of Muslims. On the triple talaq issue, the board said a bill moved by the Centre to criminalise the practice is "anti-women" and is against the Shariah and the Constitution. "The Talaq-e-Biddat bill moved by the central government is anti-women. It will create more difficulties for women. It is against Shariah and it is against the Constitution. The efforts made by the Board will continue to stop this bill in the Rajya Sabha," the statement said. The AIMPLB will start a country-wide awareness campaign against the bill and will also coordinate with Opposition parties that are against the bill,?it said. The AIMPLB also decided that state-wide committees and district-level committees will be formed under the aegis of the central body for the purpose. The Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Marriage) Bill, 2017, which criminalises instant talaq and provides for up to three years of imprisonment for Muslim men if they indulge in it, has already been passed in the Lok Sabha, but it is yet to get a nod in the Rajya Sabha, where the BJP-led NDA lacks majority. In the politically sensitive Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid case, the Supreme Court is currently hearing final arguments. In its ruling on September 30, 2010, the Allahabad High Court ordered a three-way division of the disputed 2.77 acres of the Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi site, giving a third each to the Nirmohi Akhara, the Sunni Central Wakf Board of Uttar Pradesh, and Ramlalla Virajman, the idol of the child Ram placed there.

Babri Masjid will remain mosque till eternity: AIMPLB

<p><em>WION travelled to Ayodhya on December 6, 2017 - the 25th anniversary of the Babri mosque demolition - and visited the makeshift Ram Temple that now exists on the disputed site. With cameras barred, WION brings to you this first person account from Ground Zero.</em></p>

<p>There he was, wrapped in bright and shiny clothes, adorned with jewellery, sitting pretty inside the fireproof tarpaulin tent which has been his home for the past 25 years now. There he was, the prince of Ayodhya, the darling of devotess, the man known as the &ldquo;maryada purushottama&rdquo;. There he was, a God who now, almost helplessly, lies imprisoned in a makeshift temple in his own birthplace.</p>

<p>Imprisoned. That&#39;s the word that stayed with me from the moment I passed through the first frisking point, walked through a narrow, serpentine passageway protected by walls and a roof made of wire mesh (made so narrow on purpose so that it can only accommodate a single queue of visitors), encountering two more frisking points on the way, to the point when I finally could get a glimpse of Ram Lalla, or Baby Ram.</p>

<p>The sight of gun-wielding personnel from India&#39;s Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) just outside the tent housing Baby Ram&#39;s idol inside that tent was surreal, to put it mildly. As if the God himself was under threat and required protection.</p>

<p>Reaching him is not easy. The first security barricade is almost a kilometer away from the 2.7 acre site where Ram Lalla or Baby Ram now resides. Policemen from Uttar Pradesh&#39;s Provincial Armed Constabulary manning this barricade are not too finicky. All they are interested is in ensuring that no four-wheeler passes through this barricade. The second barricade comes after 500 meters and is located just next to the palace of Dashrath - Lord Ram&#39;s father. Located at what is called Bada Sthan (Big Place) this barricade is just 500 hundred meters away from the first frisking point.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false"><img alt="" draggable="false" src="http://s.wionews.com/photos/whatsapp%20image%202017-12-08%20at%2017.12.02-20171208122746.jpeg" />
<div class="media-description">
<p>The palace of Lord Ram&#39;s father, King Dashrath in Ayodhya (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="javascript:void(0)" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>Devotees and visitors to the makeshift temple are not allowed to wear belts, carry any electronic gadgets or even a pen beyond the first frisking point. A wallet, some cash and &ldquo;prasad&rdquo; is all that is allowed in, that too, after three stages of frisking. The moment the policemen find out that you are from the media, the checking becomes even more stringent with security personnel even insisting on shoes being removed for checking. The ban on photography and videography is painted on walls at regular intervals.</p>

<p>&ldquo;Please beware of the monkeys inside. They may snatch your prasad,&rdquo; warn many policemen standing guard inside the disputed compound. The sight of policemen carrying colorful slingshots appears amusing to begin with but it takes only a few moments to realize that those slingshots are probably their only protection against the constant assaults from an army of monkeys which roams in and around Ground Zero.</p>

<p>After clearing the second frisking, the walk through the narrow wire mesh passageway, with monkeys dangling on the outside of the enclosed passageway, feels like one long walk inside a never-ending cage. Probably nowhere in the world would one have to negotiate such a fortress-like security and heavy presence of armed forces to go visit a deity.</p>

<p>On any given day, the security personnel don&#39;t allow people in the cramped queue inside that narrow wire-meshed passageway to halt for more than 7-8 seconds at the spot from where the Ram idol is seen. The fact that I visited the makeshift Ram Temple in Ayodhya on December 6, 2017 - which marked the 25th anniversary of the events of 1992 - probably was a stroke of luck. With just a couple of hours to go for the temple to close for the day, I not just escaped those long queues which are a daily feature here but also managed to stand before the Ram Lalla idol for a good five minutes before finally making my way out.</p>

<p>The priest sitting on the other side of the wire-mesh was a good-humoured man. He told me that if I could just take a step to my left and look diagonally inside the tent, I&#39;ll be able to see an idol of Lord Hanuman as well. He was right and seemed pleased when I told him that I could actually see the Hanuman idol. I asked him if he was the only priest on duty there to which he replied that there are four priests who serve the temple in shifts.</p>

<p>Watching me stand before the temple for almost five minutes, a CRPF personnel finally asked me move, his discomfort at my long halt there almost palpable. A sizeable number of the CRPF personnel guarding the innermost security ring around the makeshift temple comprises of women. Having witnessed an attempt by six heavily armed terrorists to storm the makeshift temple in 2005, the security forces clearly are taking no chances and want adequate women personnel to keep a watch on female visitors to the shrine.</p>

<p>As I made my way out, trying to soak in what I had just experienced, a plethora of thoughts and questions started flooding my mind.</p>

<p>Would a God need protection? Would a God approve of what happened in 1992? Would any God want people to fight people believing in a different God? Would a God want his devotees to be frisked at multiple locations before they can reach his temple? Would a God want to be a party to a land dispute? Would a God even care about a temple or a mosque for that matter?</p>

<p><strong>Watch WION&#39;s special segment</strong></p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="videos-block">
<div class="embed-responsive embed-responsive-16by9"><iframe class="embed-responsive-item" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JqUam7N9JJU"></iframe></div>
</div>

<div class="media-description">
<p>This segment brings to you news on 25th anniversary of Babri Mosque demolition. Watch this clip to know more. (WION)</p>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


WION travelled to Ayodhya on December 6, 2017 - the 25th anniversary of the Babri mosque demolition - and visited the makeshift Ram Temple that now exists on the disputed site. With cameras barred, WION brings to you this first person account from Ground Zero.

WION travelled to Ayodhya on December 6, 2017 - the 25th anniversary of the Babri mosque demolition - and visited the makeshift Ram Temple that now exists on the disputed site. With cameras barred, WION brings to you this first person account from Ground Zero. There he was, wrapped in bright and shiny clothes, adorned with jewellery, sitting pretty inside the fireproof tarpaulin tent which has been his home for the past 25 years now. There he was, the prince of Ayodhya, the darling of devotess, the man known as the “maryada purushottama”. There he was, a God who now, almost helplessly, lies imprisoned in a makeshift temple in his own birthplace. Imprisoned. That's the word that stayed with me from the moment I passed through the first frisking point, walked through a narrow, serpentine passageway protected by walls and a roof made of wire mesh (made so narrow on purpose so that it can only accommodate a single queue of visitors), encountering two more frisking points on the way, to the point when I finally could get a glimpse of Ram Lalla, or Baby Ram. The sight of gun-wielding personnel from India's Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF) just outside the tent housing Baby Ram's idol inside that tent was surreal, to put it mildly. As if the God himself was under threat and required protection. Reaching him is not easy. The first security barricade is almost a kilometer away from the 2.7 acre site where Ram Lalla or Baby Ram now resides. Policemen from Uttar Pradesh's Provincial Armed Constabulary manning this barricade are not too finicky. All they are interested is in ensuring that no four-wheeler passes through this barricade. The second barricade comes after 500 meters and is located just next to the palace of Dashrath - Lord Ram's father. Located at what is called Bada Sthan (Big Place) this barricade is just 500 hundred meters away from the first frisking point. The palace of Lord Ram's father, King Dashrath in Ayodhya (WION) × Devotees and visitors to the makeshift temple are not allowed to wear belts, carry any electronic gadgets or even a pen beyond the first frisking point. A wallet, some cash and “prasad” is all that is allowed in, that too, after three stages of frisking. The moment the policemen find out that you are from the media, the checking becomes even more stringent with security personnel even insisting on shoes being removed for checking. The ban on photography and videography is painted on walls at regular intervals. “Please beware of the monkeys inside. They may snatch your prasad,” warn many policemen standing guard inside the disputed compound. The sight of policemen carrying colorful slingshots appears amusing to begin with but it takes only a few moments to realize that those slingshots are probably their only protection against the constant assaults from an army of monkeys which roams in and around Ground Zero. After clearing the second frisking, the walk through the narrow wire mesh passageway, with monkeys dangling on the outside of the enclosed passageway, feels like one long walk inside a never-ending cage. Probably nowhere in the world would one have to negotiate such a fortress-like security and heavy presence of armed forces to go visit a deity. On any given day, the security personnel don't allow people in the cramped queue inside that narrow wire-meshed passageway to halt for more than 7-8 seconds at the spot from where the Ram idol is seen. The fact that I visited the makeshift Ram Temple in Ayodhya on December 6, 2017 - which marked the 25th anniversary of the events of 1992 - probably was a stroke of luck. With just a couple of hours to go for the temple to close for the day, I not just escaped those long queues which are a daily feature here but also managed to stand before the Ram Lalla idol for a good five minutes before finally making my way out. The priest sitting on the other side of the wire-mesh was a good-humoured man. He told me that if I could just take a step to my left and look diagonally inside the tent, I'll be able to see an idol of Lord Hanuman as well. He was right and seemed pleased when I told him that I could actually see the Hanuman idol. I asked him if he was the only priest on duty there to which he replied that there are four priests who serve the temple in shifts. Watching me stand before the temple for almost five minutes, a CRPF personnel finally asked me move, his discomfort at my long halt there almost palpable. A sizeable number of the CRPF personnel guarding the innermost security ring around the makeshift temple comprises of women. Having witnessed an attempt by six heavily armed terrorists to storm the makeshift temple in 2005, the security forces clearly are taking no chances and want adequate women personnel to keep a watch on female visitors to the shrine. As I made my way out, trying to soak in what I had just experienced, a plethora of thoughts and questions started flooding my mind. Would a God need protection? Would a God approve of what happened in 1992? Would any God want people to fight people believing in a different God? Would a God want his devotees to be frisked at multiple locations before they can reach his temple? Would a God want to be a party to a land dispute? Would a God even care about a temple or a mosque for that matter? Watch WION's special segment This segment brings to you news on 25th anniversary of Babri Mosque demolition. Watch this clip to know more. (WION) ×

The imprisoned Lord: First-person account from Ayodhya

<p>Senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Tapan Bhowmik on Friday stirred a controversy saying if the Supreme Court doesn&#39;t pronounce the Ayodhya verdict in favour of the Ram temple, then the apex body will be forced to do so by the Hindus. &nbsp;</p>

<p>Bhowmik, who was addressing a gathering in Madhya Pradesh&#39;s Ratlam, stated that crores of Hindus will make sure that SC favours them.</p>

<p>He added that after the verdict, their people sitting in Lok Sabha will make rules and pass a bill to build a temple at the same spot.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Verdict will go in favour of Hindus&hellip; if it does not, we will ensure it does. Hindus will do so. After this verdict, our people sitting in Lok Sabha will make rules, pass Bill to build a temple at the same spot: Tapan Bhowmik,BJP on Ram Temple in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> <a href="https://t.co/KUGxQQUww7">pic.twitter.com/KUGxQQUww7</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938991911704002561?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 8, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">If that does not happen, crores of Hindus will make that happen: Tapan Bhowmik,BJP on Ram Temple in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> <a href="https://t.co/ZHnav491Ad">pic.twitter.com/ZHnav491Ad</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938992046466940930?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 8, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>As per reports, Bhowmik made these statements during an event to mark the release of a book titled &#39;Kar Sewa Aankhon Dekhi&#39;. &nbsp;</p>


Bhowmik said that crores of Hindus will make sure that SC favours them

Senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Tapan Bhowmik on Friday stirred a controversy saying if the Supreme Court doesn't pronounce the Ayodhya verdict in favour of the Ram temple, then the apex body will be forced to do so by the Hindus. Bhowmik, who was addressing a gathering in Madhya Pradesh's Ratlam, stated that crores of Hindus will make sure that SC favours them. He added that after the verdict, their people sitting in Lok Sabha will make rules and pass a bill to build a temple at the same spot. Verdict will go in favour of Hindus… if it does not, we will ensure it does. Hindus will do so. After this verdict, our people sitting in Lok Sabha will make rules, pass Bill to build a temple at the same spot: Tapan Bhowmik,BJP on Ram Temple in #Ayodhya pic.twitter.com/KUGxQQUww7 — ANI (@ANI) December 8, 2017 × If that does not happen, crores of Hindus will make that happen: Tapan Bhowmik,BJP on Ram Temple in #Ayodhya pic.twitter.com/ZHnav491Ad — ANI (@ANI) December 8, 2017 × As per reports, Bhowmik made these statements during an event to mark the release of a book titled 'Kar Sewa Aankhon Dekhi'.

Will force SC to pronounce Ayodhya's verdict in favour of Ram Temple, says BJP leader

<p>While addressing a rally in Gujarat&#39;s Dhandhuka, Prime minister Narendra Modi has said that he has no objection to Kapil Sibal representing the Muslim community in Ayodhya case.</p>

<p>However, he questioned how is the case connected to Lok Sabha elections.</p>

<p>PM Modi said,&quot;how can he say do not find a solution to this until next election?&nbsp;how is the case connected to Lok Sabha?&quot;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">No objection that Kapil Sibal is fighting on behalf of Muslim community but how can he say do not find a solution to this (Ayodhya issue) until next election? How is it connected to Lok Sabha elections?: PM Modi in Gujarat&#39;s Dhandhuka <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/GujaratElection2017?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#GujaratElection2017</a> <a href="https://t.co/oFzXCyEWRW">pic.twitter.com/oFzXCyEWRW</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938305769019248641?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>The Sunni Waqf Board which&nbsp;is being represented by Kapil Sibal in the Ayodhya case has also disapproved Sibal&#39;s request to the Supreme Court for conducting the judgment after July 2019.</p>

<p>Haji Mehboob from The Sunni Waqf Board has said that Sibal asking for a delay in the judgment was wrong and that they want the court to pronounce the judgment as soon as possible.</p>

<p>He said: &quot;Yes Kapil Sibal is our lawyer but he is also related to a political party, his statement in Supreme Court yesterday was wrong, we want a solution to the issue at the earliest.&quot;&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Yes Kapil Sibal is our lawyer but he is also related to a political party, his statement in SC yesterday was wrong, we want a solution to the issue at the earliest: Haji Mehboob,Sunni Waqf Board <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> <a href="https://t.co/CMN8MXr5ta">pic.twitter.com/CMN8MXr5ta</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938314276044984321?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Mehboob had previously dissociated himself from Sibal&#39;s&nbsp;statement, saying &quot;we have got nothing to do with the statement&quot;.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">We have got nothing to do with his statement as we are not connected to any political party or do politics. Every Hindu and Muslim of the country wants a solution to the issue soon: Haji Mehboob,Sunni Waqf Board on Kapil Sibal <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> <a href="https://t.co/AxWFB3mAoS">pic.twitter.com/AxWFB3mAoS</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938344493572485120?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra recited a poetry on Kapil Sibal&#39;s request for extending the judgment of the Babri Masjid.</p>

<p>He sai&nbsp;&quot;<em>Badalte hue mausam ka balata hua parwana hun mai, Gujarat mein janeudhari hindu hun toh UP-Bihar mei maulana hun main</em>&quot;</p>

<p>Targetting Rahul Gandhi he said while Rahul Gandhi is a &quot;janeudhari&quot; hindu in Gujarat, he becomes a&nbsp;Muslim&nbsp;in UP-Bihar.</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="hi">Badalte hue mausam ka badalta hua parwana hun main, Gujarat mein janeudhari hindu hun toh UP-Bihar mein maulana hun main: Sambit Patra, BJP on Rahul Gandhi <a href="https://t.co/FNXrvX36fJ">pic.twitter.com/FNXrvX36fJ</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938324815689129984?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has Sibal&#39;s representation&nbsp;&quot;irresponsible and unfair&quot;. He said that &quot;Sibal must not forget that he had been the law minister in the past.&quot;&nbsp;</p>

<p>Prasad said he will ask Rahul and Sonia Gandhi to present their stand on the Ram Janambhoomi case.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">As a lawyer <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/KapilSibal?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#KapilSibal</a> can argue any matter but he should not forget that he has been the law minister in the past. What does he mean, when he says don&#39;t hear the matter till 2019 as it will have an impact outside? It is unfair and in many ways irresponsible: RS Prasad <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> <a href="https://t.co/KfDBz8fRxI">pic.twitter.com/KfDBz8fRxI</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938318660149551104?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">I am going to ask Rahul Gandhi &amp; Sonia Gandhi, please explain your party&#39;s position on should the Ram Janambhoomi case be heard at the earliest or not?: RS Prasad, Union Law minister</p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938318923614765056?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 6, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Earlier, BJP president Amit Shah had asked&nbsp;Congress to clear its&nbsp;stand on temple issue. He said at a point when Rahul&nbsp;Gandhi is visiting temples in Gujarat, Kapil Sibal is asking for a delay in Ram Janambhoomi case.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/a-wion-perspective-ayodhyas-temple-of-harmony-7163" target="_blank">Ayodhya Babri Masjid case</a>&nbsp;had asked the Supreme Court yesterday to take up the matter on July 15, 2019, once all the pleadings are complete.&nbsp; &nbsp;</p>

<p>He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Supreme court has fixed the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/babri-masjid-ramjanmabhoomi-dispute-a-timeline-25799" target="_blank">&nbsp;Ayodhya dispute matter</a>&nbsp;for further hearing on February 8, 2018.</p>

<p>Twitterati also reacted to Kapil Sibal&#39;s request to extend the court proceedings t0 2019.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Every Sensible Person Wants To Speed Up The Judicial Process But This Hypocrite Kapil Sibal Threatens To Walk Out So That <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> Ram Mandir Verdict Can Be Delayed To Post 2019 Elections. Hypocrite Congress Can Stoop To Any Low For &quot;Vote Bank&quot; Appeasement. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RamMandir?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RamMandir</a> <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/KapilSibal?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#KapilSibal</a> <a href="https://t.co/d9IiE2UbN6">pic.twitter.com/d9IiE2UbN6</a></p>
&mdash; Sir Ravindra Jadeja (@SirJadeja) <a href="https://twitter.com/SirJadeja/status/938016714654183426?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Those who think India&#39;s only enemy are Pakistan &amp; China must not forget Congress. Thanks to lord Ram coz of him many traitors like Kapil Sibal are exposed over Ram Mandir debate in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a> . These hypocrites have made <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/RamTemple?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#RamTemple</a> issue a laughing stock. <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/KapilSibal?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#KapilSibal</a></p>
&mdash; Ravi ???? (@hypernationlist) <a href="https://twitter.com/hypernationlist/status/938023344800067584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">From defending <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/kanhaiyakumar?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#kanhaiyakumar</a> to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/HardikPatel?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#HardikPatel</a> from supporting <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/TripleTalaq?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#TripleTalaq</a> &amp; <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/AIMPLB?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#AIMPLB</a> to <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SunniWaqfBoard?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SunniWaqfBoard</a> in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Ayodhya?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Ayodhya</a><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/KapilSibal?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#KapilSibal</a> has a long list of Such clients. HIS CHOICE.<br />
May Ram Lalla bless him!</p>
&mdash; Monika Arora (@advmonikaarora) <a href="https://twitter.com/advmonikaarora/status/937942658114138112?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


While addressing a rally in Gujarat's Dhandhuka, Prime minister Narendra Modi has said that he has no objection to Kapil Sibal representing the Muslim community in Ayodhya case. He, however, questioned how is the case connected to Lok Sabha elections

While addressing a rally in Gujarat's Dhandhuka, Prime minister Narendra Modi has said that he has no objection to Kapil Sibal representing the Muslim community in Ayodhya case. However, he questioned how is the case connected to Lok Sabha elections. PM Modi said,"how can he say do not find a solution to this until next election? how is the case connected to Lok Sabha?" No objection that Kapil Sibal is fighting on behalf of Muslim community but how can he say do not find a solution to this (Ayodhya issue) until next election? How is it connected to Lok Sabha elections?: PM Modi in Gujarat's Dhandhuka #GujaratElection2017 pic.twitter.com/oFzXCyEWRW — ANI (@ANI) December 6, 2017 × The Sunni Waqf Board which is being represented by Kapil Sibal in the Ayodhya case has also disapproved Sibal's request to the Supreme Court for conducting the judgment after July 2019. Haji Mehboob from The Sunni Waqf Board has said that Sibal asking for a delay in the judgment was wrong and that they want the court to pronounce the judgment as soon as possible. He said: "Yes Kapil Sibal is our lawyer but he is also related to a political party, his statement in Supreme Court yesterday was wrong, we want a solution to the issue at the earliest." Yes Kapil Sibal is our lawyer but he is also related to a political party, his statement in SC yesterday was wrong, we want a solution to the issue at the earliest: Haji Mehboob,Sunni Waqf Board #Ayodhya pic.twitter.com/CMN8MXr5ta — ANI (@ANI) December 6, 2017 × Mehboob had previously dissociated himself from Sibal's statement, saying "we have got nothing to do with the statement". We have got nothing to do with his statement as we are not connected to any political party or do politics. Every Hindu and Muslim of the country wants a solution to the issue soon: Haji Mehboob,Sunni Waqf Board on Kapil Sibal #Ayodhya pic.twitter.com/AxWFB3mAoS — ANI (@ANI) December 6, 2017 × BJP spokesperson Sambit Patra recited a poetry on Kapil Sibal's request for extending the judgment of the Babri Masjid. He sai "Badalte hue mausam ka balata hua parwana hun mai, Gujarat mein janeudhari hindu hun toh UP-Bihar mei maulana hun main" Targetting Rahul Gandhi he said while Rahul Gandhi is a "janeudhari" hindu in Gujarat, he becomes a Muslim in UP-Bihar. Badalte hue mausam ka badalta hua parwana hun main, Gujarat mein janeudhari hindu hun toh UP-Bihar mein maulana hun main: Sambit Patra, BJP on Rahul Gandhi pic.twitter.com/FNXrvX36fJ — ANI (@ANI) December 6, 2017 × Union law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad has Sibal's representation "irresponsible and unfair". He said that "Sibal must not forget that he had been the law minister in the past." Prasad said he will ask Rahul and Sonia Gandhi to present their stand on the Ram Janambhoomi case. As a lawyer #KapilSibal can argue any matter but he should not forget that he has been the law minister in the past. What does he mean, when he says don't hear the matter till 2019 as it will have an impact outside? It is unfair and in many ways irresponsible: RS Prasad #Ayodhya pic.twitter.com/KfDBz8fRxI — ANI (@ANI) December 6, 2017 × I am going to ask Rahul Gandhi & Sonia Gandhi, please explain your party's position on should the Ram Janambhoomi case be heard at the earliest or not?: RS Prasad, Union Law minister — ANI (@ANI) December 6, 2017 × Earlier, BJP president Amit Shah had asked Congress to clear its stand on temple issue. He said at a point when Rahul Gandhi is visiting temples in Gujarat, Kapil Sibal is asking for a delay in Ram Janambhoomi case. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya Babri Masjid case had asked the Supreme Court yesterday to take up the matter on July 15, 2019, once all the pleadings are complete. He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete. The Supreme court has fixed the Ayodhya dispute matter for further hearing on February 8, 2018. Twitterati also reacted to Kapil Sibal's request to extend the court proceedings t0 2019. Every Sensible Person Wants To Speed Up The Judicial Process But This Hypocrite Kapil Sibal Threatens To Walk Out So That #Ayodhya Ram Mandir Verdict Can Be Delayed To Post 2019 Elections. Hypocrite Congress Can Stoop To Any Low For "Vote Bank" Appeasement. #RamMandir #KapilSibal pic.twitter.com/d9IiE2UbN6 — Sir Ravindra Jadeja (@SirJadeja) December 5, 2017 × Those who think India's only enemy are Pakistan & China must not forget Congress. Thanks to lord Ram coz of him many traitors like Kapil Sibal are exposed over Ram Mandir debate in #Ayodhya . These hypocrites have made #RamTemple issue a laughing stock. #KapilSibal — Ravi ???? (@hypernationlist) December 5, 2017 × From defending #kanhaiyakumar to #HardikPatel from supporting #TripleTalaq & #AIMPLB to #SunniWaqfBoard in #Ayodhya#KapilSibal has a long list of Such clients. HIS CHOICE. May Ram Lalla bless him! — Monika Arora (@advmonikaarora) December 5, 2017 ×

How is Ayodhya case related to 2019 elections? PM Modi asks Kapil Sibal in Gujarat election rally

<p>The demolition of the Babri Masjid proves that the idea of India remains contested, and that the RSS wants to alter the character of the nation in its own image.</p>

<p>Ayodhya was the first successful experiment whereby Muslim votes became electorally irrelevant as a consolidated Hindu vote propelled the BJP to power under Atal Bihari Vajpayee.</p>

<p>Ayodhya is also a reminder of the fact that accountability in politics is a faraway dream.</p>

<p>As of today, there has been no legal conclusion as how the conspiracy to bring down the disputed structure was hatched.</p>

<p>Ayodhya is also the first case where faith got the better of the constitutional imagination of the country. The violence which broke out 25 years ago challenged, irrevocably, the separation of state and religion. Religion has seeped into the political arena and mainstreamed a style of politics under which Muslims can live side-by-side with Hindus but will be politically disempowered.</p>

<p>Twenty-five years down the line, it has become okay to say the minority vote does not matter. This is not to say the Congress did not pamper minorities politically and created a rift at the grassroots level. In fact, Ayodhya should also be seen in the context of the Shah Bano judgement, and the subsequent intervention by Rajiv Gandhi which sent home the message that the mainstream parties discriminated against Hindus.</p>

<p>This was coupled with the Mandal agitation which, in the name of social justice, lifted opportunistic politicians into the chairs of power. It was this tension between Mandal and Kamandal politics that allowed Ayodhya to evolve into a political project.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
Ayodhya further changed the character of Hinduism. Ayodhya is an attempt to build the identity of the Indian state around one sampradaya (sect) of Hinduism. Hinduism, unlike other religions, has a plethora of gods. Shakta and Saiva are two of the hundreds of sampradayas which exist in India.</p>

<p>Ayodhya also injected an element of &lsquo;true to faith&rsquo; into Hinduism.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>Ayodhya was an attempt to redefine the concept of a national around shared religious belief that would take us beyond caste-based divisions of the Hindu society.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=Ayodhya was an attempt to redefine the concept of a national around shared religious belief that would take us beyond caste-based divisions of the Hindu society."><i class="fa fa-share">&nbsp;</i></a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

<p>Ayodhya is a challenge to Indian multiculturalism which is being belittled in the name of secularism and liberalism. Ayodhya is being used as a cure for casteism on which Hinduism rests. The idea is to dissolve internal deficits by creating a crisis of identity and future. Ayodhya was an attempt to redefine the concept of a nation&nbsp;around shared religious belief that would take us beyond the caste-based divisions of Hindu society.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The only worry is that 25 years down the line, Ayodhya is not a contested idea anymore. There is a temple in Ayodhya and no sane person will consider removing it. So, the discussion is not about title, culpability, or where a temple should be built. The debate has boiled down to how and when. Through consensus or judicial process?</p>

<p>I don&rsquo;t call Ayodhya a wound either from the Muslim or the Hindu perspective. It is not an unresolved project. Ayodhya is the beginning of a bigger project which blends a crude majoritarianism and nationalism that is always trying to search for the &quot;other&quot;&nbsp;to validate itself.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The process is helped by the country&#39;s undemocratic liberal elites who fail to take into account how modernity is reshaping Hinduism in the country. They failed to see the crassness and corruption of the so-called social justice calls of the caste-based parties that only ended up perpetuating dynasties.</p>

<p>The liberal elites felt that they would be the solution to illiberal and majoritarian politics. That was not to be. In turn, the Sankritisation of OBCs created Hindu mascots out of them, further squeezing out the liberal elites who failed to understand that India had started to consider them as outsiders and the political project of Hinduism is the real thing. Today, Ayodhya is not about the birthplace of Ram, it is about Hindu vanity.</p>

<p>It is about a sense of power. It is about a sense of assertion. It is not about renunciation, which Ram did at the drop of a&nbsp;hat when asked to leave the throne for Bharat. There is no <i>maryada </i>either. Afterall&nbsp;Ram has been known as the&nbsp;<i>maryadapurushottam</i> Ram. <i>Maryada </i>was crossed when one political class wanted to bring down the mosque and the other wanted to cooperate so that the problem would get resolved.<br />
&nbsp;<br />
The nation cannot retrace its steps. That is not possible, although we are coming close to the horrible and morbid politics of Pakistan which differentiates between its own people.</p>

<p>It is a choice which India will have to make. The truth is that the temple will stand in Ayodhya forever, but the challenge is what we make of it.</p>

<p>Can we come together and pray that similar violence in the name of God never takes place. It will require sanity from both sides. It will require forgiveness from both sides.</p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).</em></p>


Ayodhya is the beginning of a bigger project which blends a crude majoritarianism and nationalism that is always trying to search for the 'other'?to validate itself

The demolition of the Babri Masjid proves that the idea of India remains contested, and that the RSS wants to alter the character of the nation in its own image. Ayodhya was the first successful experiment whereby Muslim votes became electorally irrelevant as a consolidated Hindu vote propelled the BJP to power under Atal Bihari Vajpayee. Ayodhya is also a reminder of the fact that accountability in politics is a faraway dream. As of today, there has been no legal conclusion as how the conspiracy to bring down the disputed structure was hatched. Ayodhya is also the first case where faith got the better of the constitutional imagination of the country. The violence which broke out 25 years ago challenged, irrevocably, the separation of state and religion. Religion has seeped into the political arena and mainstreamed a style of politics under which Muslims can live side-by-side with Hindus but will be politically disempowered. Twenty-five years down the line, it has become okay to say the minority vote does not matter. This is not to say the Congress did not pamper minorities politically and created a rift at the grassroots level. In fact, Ayodhya should also be seen in the context of the Shah Bano judgement, and the subsequent intervention by Rajiv Gandhi which sent home the message that the mainstream parties discriminated against Hindus. This was coupled with the Mandal agitation which, in the name of social justice, lifted opportunistic politicians into the chairs of power. It was this tension between Mandal and Kamandal politics that allowed Ayodhya to evolve into a political project. Ayodhya further changed the character of Hinduism. Ayodhya is an attempt to build the identity of the Indian state around one sampradaya (sect) of Hinduism. Hinduism, unlike other religions, has a plethora of gods. Shakta and Saiva are two of the hundreds of sampradayas which exist in India. Ayodhya also injected an element of ‘true to faith’ into Hinduism. Ayodhya was an attempt to redefine the concept of a national around shared religious belief that would take us beyond caste-based divisions of the Hindu society. × Ayodhya is a challenge to Indian multiculturalism which is being belittled in the name of secularism and liberalism. Ayodhya is being used as a cure for casteism on which Hinduism rests. The idea is to dissolve internal deficits by creating a crisis of identity and future. Ayodhya was an attempt to redefine the concept of a nation around shared religious belief that would take us beyond the caste-based divisions of Hindu society. The only worry is that 25 years down the line, Ayodhya is not a contested idea anymore. There is a temple in Ayodhya and no sane person will consider removing it. So, the discussion is not about title, culpability, or where a temple should be built. The debate has boiled down to how and when. Through consensus or judicial process? I don’t call Ayodhya a wound either from the Muslim or the Hindu perspective. It is not an unresolved project. Ayodhya is the beginning of a bigger project which blends a crude majoritarianism and nationalism that is always trying to search for the "other" to validate itself. The process is helped by the country's undemocratic liberal elites who fail to take into account how modernity is reshaping Hinduism in the country. They failed to see the crassness and corruption of the so-called social justice calls of the caste-based parties that only ended up perpetuating dynasties. The liberal elites felt that they would be the solution to illiberal and majoritarian politics. That was not to be. In turn, the Sankritisation of OBCs created Hindu mascots out of them, further squeezing out the liberal elites who failed to understand that India had started to consider them as outsiders and the political project of Hinduism is the real thing. Today, Ayodhya is not about the birthplace of Ram, it is about Hindu vanity. It is about a sense of power. It is about a sense of assertion. It is not about renunciation, which Ram did at the drop of a hat when asked to leave the throne for Bharat. There is no maryada either. Afterall Ram has been known as the maryadapurushottam Ram. Maryada was crossed when one political class wanted to bring down the mosque and the other wanted to cooperate so that the problem would get resolved. The nation cannot retrace its steps. That is not possible, although we are coming close to the horrible and morbid politics of Pakistan which differentiates between its own people. It is a choice which India will have to make. The truth is that the temple will stand in Ayodhya forever, but the challenge is what we make of it. Can we come together and pray that similar violence in the name of God never takes place. It will require sanity from both sides. It will require forgiveness from both sides. (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Demolition of Babri Masjid proves idea of India remains contested

<p>On the evening of 3 December 1971, at about&nbsp;5:40 pm, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) launched surprise per-emptive strikes on eleven airfields in north-western India, including Agra, which was 300 miles (480 km) from the border. At the time of this attack, the Taj Mahal was camouflaged with a forest of twigs and leaves and draped with burlap because its marble glowed like a white beacon in the moonlight.</p>

<p>The marble&#39;s shine is less provocative these days, not because the structure decided to protest against the disparaging debate of why it could not be part of the state&#39;s tourism booklet but because it suffocates from the poor quality of&nbsp;debates on issues of air pollution. The debate is seasonal and the yearly trend is almost a decade old.</p>

<p>Even In 1942, during the World War II, Taj Mahal was covered in bamboo scaffolding as the British thought that the Taj Mahal was vulnerable to bombing by the German Luftwaffe bombers (and also the Japanese).</p>

<p>Taj Mahal, as a monument has fought against more than security threats and air pollution, its burqa is more than the coverage of twigs and bamboo. In the smog of political tussle and changing ideologies, it has on many occasion tugged to its burqa.</p>

<p>It almost tugged to its burqa when fictional novels questioned its existence and, based on sketchy facts, presented an alternate image of a temple which was converted to make place for the Taj. People agreed, not all although.</p>

<p>The Archaeological department installed a lab to check whether the city pollution and other pollutants were degrading the marble and its shine. To protect it, a mudpack solution was suggested. Wherein, the marble is polished by a certain mud. Rubbing mud and making it shiny. The deal is still on.</p>

<p>There is no research released on the gradual effect of time on the health of the Taj Mahal.</p>

<p>One of the wonders of the world, Taj Mahal often gazes at its nearest companion, the Mosque and tries to identify if anyone else is clad in similar shadow. When people walk by and look at the monument, whether the sense of belonging is national or anti-national. Whether such thoughts will make it leftist or something else.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The worlds largest democracy is trying to strengthen its defences and forces chose to look the other way as there was bounty announced on the head of the leading artist of a film named Padmavati.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Talking of safety and security, Pakistan government was ordered by a judicial review board to release Hafiz Saeed, the mastermind of 26/11. The US had announced a $10 million bounty for Saaed for his alleged role in the Mumbai terror attack.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The thunder and storm began as the air cleared a bit, the prediction says, the suffocation will subside.</p>

<p>Taj Mahal looked the other way towards Ayodhya now, its 06 Dec.</p>

<p>The burqa stays...</p>

<p><em>(Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).</em></p>


The Taj Mahal is falling victim to chronic pollution and politicisation.

On the evening of 3 December 1971, at about 5:40 pm, the Pakistan Air Force (PAF) launched surprise per-emptive strikes on eleven airfields in north-western India, including Agra, which was 300 miles (480 km) from the border. At the time of this attack, the Taj Mahal was camouflaged with a forest of twigs and leaves and draped with burlap because its marble glowed like a white beacon in the moonlight. The marble's shine is less provocative these days, not because the structure decided to protest against the disparaging debate of why it could not be part of the state's tourism booklet but because it suffocates from the poor quality of debates on issues of air pollution. The debate is seasonal and the yearly trend is almost a decade old. Even In 1942, during the World War II, Taj Mahal was covered in bamboo scaffolding as the British thought that the Taj Mahal was vulnerable to bombing by the German Luftwaffe bombers (and also the Japanese). Taj Mahal, as a monument has fought against more than security threats and air pollution, its burqa is more than the coverage of twigs and bamboo. In the smog of political tussle and changing ideologies, it has on many occasion tugged to its burqa. It almost tugged to its burqa when fictional novels questioned its existence and, based on sketchy facts, presented an alternate image of a temple which was converted to make place for the Taj. People agreed, not all although. The Archaeological department installed a lab to check whether the city pollution and other pollutants were degrading the marble and its shine. To protect it, a mudpack solution was suggested. Wherein, the marble is polished by a certain mud. Rubbing mud and making it shiny. The deal is still on. There is no research released on the gradual effect of time on the health of the Taj Mahal. One of the wonders of the world, Taj Mahal often gazes at its nearest companion, the Mosque and tries to identify if anyone else is clad in similar shadow. When people walk by and look at the monument, whether the sense of belonging is national or anti-national. Whether such thoughts will make it leftist or something else. The worlds largest democracy is trying to strengthen its defences and forces chose to look the other way as there was bounty announced on the head of the leading artist of a film named Padmavati. Talking of safety and security, Pakistan government was ordered by a judicial review board to release Hafiz Saeed, the mastermind of 26/11. The US had announced a $10 million bounty for Saaed for his alleged role in the Mumbai terror attack. The thunder and storm began as the air cleared a bit, the prediction says, the suffocation will subside. Taj Mahal looked the other way towards Ayodhya now, its 06 Dec. The burqa stays... (Disclaimer: The author writes here in a personal capacity).

Opinion: Pollution and politics through Taj Mahal's gaze

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/how-is-ayodhya-case-related-to-2019-elections-pm-modi-asks-kapil-sibal-26043" target="_blank">How is Ayodhya case related to 2019 elections? PM Modi asks Kapil Sibal in Gujarat election rally</a></p>

<p>While addressing a rally in Gujarat&#39;s Dhandhuka, Prime minister Narendra Modi has said that he has no objection to Kapil Sibal representing the Muslim community in Ayodhya case. However, he questioned how is the case connected to Lok Sabha elections.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/no-exemption-in-odd-even-scheme-delhi-governments-pollution-action-plan-to-ngt-26038" target="_blank">&#39;No exemption&#39; in odd-even scheme: Delhi government&#39;s pollution action plan to NGT</a></p>

<p>The Delhi government today&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/oxygen-chamber-in-gurgaon-a-respite-from-pollution-25018">told the National Green Tribunal(NGT)</a>&nbsp;that there would be no exemption&nbsp;for vehicles in the odd-even scheme when it implemented next time. The Kejriwal government submitted its&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/delhi-pollution-children-are-inhaling-cigarette-the-moment-they-are-born-24287">action plan to combat pollution</a>&nbsp;in the national capital.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-move-to-recognise-jerusalem-as-capital-of-israel-will-lead-to-escalation-of-tension-china-26028" target="_blank">Jerusalem status: &#39;Concerned about possible escalation of tension,&#39; says China</a></p>

<p>China said today US President Donald Trump&#39;s decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel would lead to &quot;possible escalation of tensions&quot;. Britain which is the&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-tells-mideast-leaders-he-will-move-embassy-to-jerusalem-breaking-with-us-policy-25980">principal ally of the United States&nbsp;</a>expressed &quot;concern&quot; and said Jerusalem should be part of the &quot;final settlement between the Israelis&nbsp;and the Palestinians&quot;&nbsp;</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/cricket/ipl-franchises-allowed-to-retain-5-players-26046" target="_blank">IPL franchises allowed to retain 5 players: Rajeev Shukla</a></p>

<p>Providing a long-pending solution to the Indian Premier League (IPL) teams to retain their big players, the governing council on Wednesday announced that the franchises can retain a maximum of five players by virtue of a combination of pre-auction retention and Right To Match (RTM) cards for the upcoming 2018 edition.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/metoo-time-magazine-announces-silence-breakers-as-person-of-the-year-26051" target="_blank">#Metoo: Time magazine announces &#39;Silence breakers&#39; as &#39;Person of the Year&#39;</a></p>

<p>Time Magazine&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/photos/asians-featured-on-time-magazine-cover-page-as-person-of-the-year-589#photo-30703">has designated &quot;silence breakers</a>&quot;&nbsp;who triggered the sexual harassment revelations as &quot;Person of the Year&quot;. Time magazine publishes the &quot;Person of the Year&quot; on 6th December every year. It has decided to bring the&nbsp;Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment case into focus this year.&nbsp;</p>


How is Ayodhya case related to 2019 elections? PM Modi asks Kapil Sibal in Gujarat election rally While addressing a rally in Gujarat's Dhandhuka, Prime minister Narendra Modi has said that he has no objection to Kapil Sibal representing the Muslim community in Ayodhya case. However, he questioned how is the case connected to Lok Sabha elections. 'No exemption' in odd-even scheme: Delhi government's pollution action plan to NGT The Delhi government today told the National Green Tribunal(NGT) that there would be no exemption for vehicles in the odd-even scheme when it implemented next time. The Kejriwal government submitted its action plan to combat pollution in the national capital. Jerusalem status: 'Concerned about possible escalation of tension,' says China China said today US President Donald Trump's decision to recognise Jerusalem as the capital of Israel would lead to "possible escalation of tensions". Britain which is the principal ally of the United States expressed "concern" and said Jerusalem should be part of the "final settlement between the Israelis and the Palestinians" IPL franchises allowed to retain 5 players: Rajeev Shukla Providing a long-pending solution to the Indian Premier League (IPL) teams to retain their big players, the governing council on Wednesday announced that the franchises can retain a maximum of five players by virtue of a combination of pre-auction retention and Right To Match (RTM) cards for the upcoming 2018 edition. #Metoo: Time magazine announces 'Silence breakers' as 'Person of the Year' Time Magazine has designated "silence breakers" who triggered the sexual harassment revelations as "Person of the Year". Time magazine publishes the "Person of the Year" on 6th December every year. It has decided to bring the Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment case into focus this year.

WION Evening News brief, 6 December, 2017

<p>The Supreme court has fixed the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/babri-masjid-ramjanmabhoomi-dispute-a-timeline-25799" target="_blank"> Ayodhya dispute matter</a> for further hearing on February 8, 2018.</p>

<p>Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/a-wion-perspective-ayodhyas-temple-of-harmony-7163" target="_blank">Ayodhya Babri Masjid case</a> has asked the Supreme Court&nbsp;to take up the matter on July 15, 2019 once all the pleadings are complete.&nbsp; &nbsp;</p>

<p>He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Ayodhya Dispute: Kapil Sibal told SC that whenever this matter is heard,there are serious repercussions outside court and to preserve the decorum of law and order,and that he personally requests court to take this matter up on July 15, 2019, once all the pleadings are complete</p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/937976294670663680?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Earlier during the proceeding in the Supreme Court, Sibal read out the details of exhibits filed by the contesting defendants in the Allahabad High Court.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He told the three-judge bench in the Supreme Court that all the pleadings were not complete.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Tushar Mehta who is representing the State of Uttar Pradesh negated the arguments presented by Kapil Sibal. He told the Supreme Court that all the related documents and requisite translation copies are on record.</p>

<p>Raising doubts over ASG Mehta, Sibal questioned how come more than 19,000 pages of documents can be filed in such short time.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Sibal told the Supreme Court that he and other petitioners have not been served relevant documents of pleadings.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Meanwhile, the petitioners who had filed their pleadings in Allahabad High Court, have asked the Supreme Court for a reasonable time to translate, file and serve the copies of all the exhibits and relevant documents.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Ayodhya dispute: Petitioners are pleading in SC for reasonable time to translate, file and serve the copies of all the exhibits and relevant documents, which were filed before the Allahabad High Court bench at Lucknow.</p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/937983384004861952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Good news is that the Supreme Court has taken the formula proposed by us on record: Wasim Rizvi,Shia Waqf Board Chairman on Ayodhya hearing <a href="https://t.co/tSVdBti2a3">pic.twitter.com/tSVdBti2a3</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/937984538873012225?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan along with other petitioner counsels have also demanded for a larger bench of judges. They have demanded a bench of at least seven judges.&nbsp;&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Ayodhya dispute: Advocates Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan along with other petitioner counsels want a larger bench of atleast 7 Judges to hear this matter.</p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/937987471597379584?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p><em>(With inputs from ANI)</em></p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in?Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has asked the Supreme Court?to take up the matter on July 15, next year,?once all the pleadings are complete.

The Supreme court has fixed the Ayodhya dispute matter for further hearing on February 8, 2018. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has asked the Supreme Court to take up the matter on July 15, 2019 once all the pleadings are complete. He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete. Ayodhya Dispute: Kapil Sibal told SC that whenever this matter is heard,there are serious repercussions outside court and to preserve the decorum of law and order,and that he personally requests court to take this matter up on July 15, 2019, once all the pleadings are complete — ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017 × Earlier during the proceeding in the Supreme Court, Sibal read out the details of exhibits filed by the contesting defendants in the Allahabad High Court. He told the three-judge bench in the Supreme Court that all the pleadings were not complete. Additional Solicitor General (ASG) Tushar Mehta who is representing the State of Uttar Pradesh negated the arguments presented by Kapil Sibal. He told the Supreme Court that all the related documents and requisite translation copies are on record. Raising doubts over ASG Mehta, Sibal questioned how come more than 19,000 pages of documents can be filed in such short time. Sibal told the Supreme Court that he and other petitioners have not been served relevant documents of pleadings. Meanwhile, the petitioners who had filed their pleadings in Allahabad High Court, have asked the Supreme Court for a reasonable time to translate, file and serve the copies of all the exhibits and relevant documents. Ayodhya dispute: Petitioners are pleading in SC for reasonable time to translate, file and serve the copies of all the exhibits and relevant documents, which were filed before the Allahabad High Court bench at Lucknow. — ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017 × Good news is that the Supreme Court has taken the formula proposed by us on record: Wasim Rizvi,Shia Waqf Board Chairman on Ayodhya hearing pic.twitter.com/tSVdBti2a3 — ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017 × Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan along with other petitioner counsels have also demanded for a larger bench of judges. They have demanded a bench of at least seven judges. Ayodhya dispute: Advocates Kapil Sibal, Rajiv Dhawan along with other petitioner counsels want a larger bench of atleast 7 Judges to hear this matter. — ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017 × (With inputs from ANI)

Ayodhya case: Supreme Court defers case to February next year

<p>Congress leader Randeep Surejwala has said that Congress stand has always been clear and that the BJP is playing the role of &#39;Manthara&#39;.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Surejwala said, &quot; The Congress stand has always been clear, that Ayodhya case will be decided by Supreme Court, same has been said by Law minister many times.&quot;</p>

<p>He said that that the Congress party has nothing to do with who Kapil Sibal represents.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Referring to Arun Jaitley&#39;s representation in the Bhopal Gas Tragedy&nbsp;case, the Congress leader asked: should the entire BJP be blamed for that?</p>

<p>BJP President Amit Shah had asked&nbsp;Congress to clear their stand on temple issue after&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/ayodhya-case-next-hearing-in-supreme-court-in-february-2018-25932" target="_blank">Kapil Sibal asked for a delay in Ramjanambhoomi case</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said at a point when Rahul&nbsp;Gandhi is visiting temples in Gujarat, Kapil Sibal is asking for a delay in Ram Janambhoomi case.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/a-wion-perspective-ayodhyas-temple-of-harmony-7163" target="_blank">Ayodhya Babri Masjid case</a>&nbsp;has asked the Supreme Court&nbsp;to take up the matter on July 15, 2019 once all the pleadings are complete.&nbsp; &nbsp;</p>

<p>He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete.&nbsp;</p>


Replying to Amit Shah, Congress leader Randeep Surejwala has said that Congress stand has always been clear and that the BJP is playing the role of Manthara

Congress leader Randeep Surejwala has said that Congress stand has always been clear and that the BJP is playing the role of 'Manthara'. Surejwala said, " The Congress stand has always been clear, that Ayodhya case will be decided by Supreme Court, same has been said by Law minister many times." He said that that the Congress party has nothing to do with who Kapil Sibal represents. Referring to Arun Jaitley's representation in the Bhopal Gas Tragedy case, the Congress leader asked: should the entire BJP be blamed for that? BJP President Amit Shah had asked Congress to clear their stand on temple issue after Kapil Sibal asked for a delay in Ramjanambhoomi case. He said at a point when Rahul Gandhi is visiting temples in Gujarat, Kapil Sibal is asking for a delay in Ram Janambhoomi case. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has asked the Supreme Court to take up the matter on July 15, 2019 once all the pleadings are complete. He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete.

BJP playing the role of 'Manthara': Congress leader

<p>BJP President Amit Shah has asked&nbsp;Congress to clear their stand on temple issue after&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/ayodhya-case-next-hearing-in-supreme-court-in-february-2018-25932" target="_blank">Kapil Sibal asked for a delay in Ramjanambhoomi case</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said at a point when Rahul&nbsp;Gandhi is visiting temples in Gujarat, Kapil Sibal is asking for a delay in Ram Janambhoomi case.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said, &quot; Today a surprising stand was taken in Supreme Court by Congress leader and Sunni Waqf Board lawyer Kapil Sibal Ji, he said hearing should be deferred till&nbsp;2019 LS polls. Congress should clear its stand on this.&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Rahul Ji should tell us what is his view on this.&quot;&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Rahul ji is visiting temples in Gujarat but on the other hand Kapil Sibal is being used to delay Ram janmbhoomi case. Rahul ji should tell us what his view on this is: Amit Shah <a href="https://t.co/dDwuV1YfXl">pic.twitter.com/dDwuV1YfXl</a></p>
&mdash; ANI (@ANI) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANI/status/938020019715186688?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">December 5, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/videos/a-wion-perspective-ayodhyas-temple-of-harmony-7163" target="_blank">Ayodhya Babri Masjid case</a>&nbsp;has asked the Supreme Court&nbsp;to take up the matter on July 15, 2019 once all the pleadings are complete.&nbsp; &nbsp;</p>

<p>He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete.&nbsp;</p>


BJP President Amit Shah has asked?Congress to clear his stand on temple issue after?Kapil Sibal asked for a delay in Ramjanambhoomi case

BJP President Amit Shah has asked Congress to clear their stand on temple issue after Kapil Sibal asked for a delay in Ramjanambhoomi case. He said at a point when Rahul Gandhi is visiting temples in Gujarat, Kapil Sibal is asking for a delay in Ram Janambhoomi case. He said, " Today a surprising stand was taken in Supreme Court by Congress leader and Sunni Waqf Board lawyer Kapil Sibal Ji, he said hearing should be deferred till 2019 LS polls. Congress should clear its stand on this." "Rahul Ji should tell us what is his view on this." Rahul ji is visiting temples in Gujarat but on the other hand Kapil Sibal is being used to delay Ram janmbhoomi case. Rahul ji should tell us what his view on this is: Amit Shah pic.twitter.com/dDwuV1YfXl — ANI (@ANI) December 5, 2017 × Senior advocate Kapil Sibal who is representing the Sunni Waqf Board in Ayodhya Babri Masjid case has asked the Supreme Court to take up the matter on July 15, 2019 once all the pleadings are complete. He told the Supreme Court that serious repercussions will be created outside the court, whenever the matter is heard. To preserve the decorum of law and order, the court should conduct the proceedings after all pleadings are complete.

Clear your stand on temple issue: Amit Shah to Rahul Gandhi

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/ayodhya-case-next-hearing-in-supreme-court-in-february-2018-25932" target="_blank">Ayodhya case: Supreme Court defers case to February next year</a></p>

<p>The Supreme court has fixed the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/babri-masjid-ramjanmabhoomi-dispute-a-timeline-25799" target="_blank">&nbsp;Ayodhya dispute matter</a>&nbsp;for further hearing on February 8, 2018.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/no-evidence-to-link-mallya-to-fraud-charge-says-his-lawyer-in-uk-court-25947" target="_blank">No evidence to link Mallya to fraud charge, says his lawyer in UK court</a></p>

<p>Mallya&rsquo;s defence lawyer&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/repeatedly-said-charges-against-me-fabricated-and-baseless-mallya-25834">Clare Montgomery today told the Westminster Magistrates&nbsp;</a>Court that there was no evidence against the liquor baron to extradite him to India The UK court is hearing a&nbsp;<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/vijay-mallya-arrested-in-london-appears-in-court-granted-bail-20957">case related to money laundering&nbsp;</a>and fraud with Mallya owing several Indian banks around Rs 9,000 crores.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-to-hear-rohingya-petition-on-january-31-25945" target="_blank">Supreme Court to hear Rohingya petition on January 31</a></p>

<p>The Supreme Court has scheduled the<a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/supreme-court-to-hear-rohingya-refugees-pil-challenging-deportation-22374" target="_blank">&nbsp;hearing for Rohingya refugees deportation&nbsp;</a>on January 31. The apex court has posted all petitions relating to the deportation of Muslim Rohingya refugees for a detailed hearing in January.&nbsp;</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/al-qaedas-top-leader-killed-in-us-afghan-joint-op-25926" target="_blank">Top al Qaeda leader Omar </a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/al-qaedas-top-leader-killed-in-us-afghan-joint-op-25926" target="_blank">Mansoon</a><a href="http://www.wionews.com/south-asia/al-qaedas-top-leader-killed-in-us-afghan-joint-op-25926" target="_blank"> killed in US-Afghan joint operation</a></p>

<p>Al Qaeda&nbsp;leader, as well as over 80 other militants, have been killed in a joint operation by Afghan and US officials in Afghanistan, reports say. The leader, Omar Khetab, famously known as&nbsp;Omar Mansoon was gunned down during the attack, Afghan&#39;s Intelligence agency National Directorate of Security (NDS) was reported saying.&nbsp;</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/bus-bomb-kills-eight-passengers-in-syrias-homs-city-state-media-25940" target="_blank">Bus bomb kills eight passengers in Syria&#39;s Homs city: Report</a></p>

<p>A bomb blast in the Syrian city of Homs killed eight people and injured around 16 in a bus on Tuesday, media reports said.&nbsp;The blast took place near al-Baath university, in the streets of &nbsp;Akrama neighbourhood - home to members of the Alawite minority to which President Bashar al-Assad belongs.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


Ayodhya case: Supreme Court defers case to February next year The Supreme court has fixed the Ayodhya dispute matter for further hearing on February 8, 2018. No evidence to link Mallya to fraud charge, says his lawyer in UK court Mallya’s defence lawyer Clare Montgomery today told the Westminster Magistrates Court that there was no evidence against the liquor baron to extradite him to India The UK court is hearing a case related to money laundering and fraud with Mallya owing several Indian banks around Rs 9,000 crores. Supreme Court to hear Rohingya petition on January 31 The Supreme Court has scheduled the hearing for Rohingya refugees deportation on January 31. The apex court has posted all petitions relating to the deportation of Muslim Rohingya refugees for a detailed hearing in January. Top al Qaeda leader Omar Mansoon killed in US-Afghan joint operation Al Qaeda leader, as well as over 80 other militants, have been killed in a joint operation by Afghan and US officials in Afghanistan, reports say. The leader, Omar Khetab, famously known as Omar Mansoon was gunned down during the attack, Afghan's Intelligence agency National Directorate of Security (NDS) was reported saying. Bus bomb kills eight passengers in Syria's Homs city: Report A bomb blast in the Syrian city of Homs killed eight people and injured around 16 in a bus on Tuesday, media reports said. The blast took place near al-Baath university, in the streets of Akrama neighbourhood - home to members of the Alawite minority to which President Bashar al-Assad belongs.

WION Evening News Brief, December 5, 2017

<p>Subramanian Swamy, senior BJP leader has assured the devotees of Lord Ram that they will be able to celebrate next Diwali in Ayodhya.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said that the construction of Ram Temple will commence soon and it will be complete by next Diwali in October.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said, &quot;The&nbsp;next Diwali will be celebrated in the newly constructed temple.&quot;</p>

<p>He also assured that everything needed for the construction&nbsp;of the Ram temple was ready.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Emphasising that there is no need to make a new law he said that the Narasimha Rao government had issued an affidavit to the Supreme Court which stated that the land will be given to Hindus if it is proven that there was a temple at the place.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He said, &quot;it was just the matter of attaching it like the Swami Narayan Mandir&quot;.</p>

<p>Claiming that the existence of the temple was already proven, he was confident of winning the case. He further said that although they can bring the law, it was not needed.&nbsp;</p>

<p>He also said that the Sunni Waqf Board has nothing for rebuttal.</p>

<p>Swamy has&nbsp;presented an additional argument that offering prayers in that land is the fundamental right of Hindus. Muslims do not have that right and they&nbsp;are just interested in the property.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>

<p>&nbsp;</p>


He said that everything needed for the construction?of the Ram temple was ready

Subramanian Swamy, senior BJP leader has assured the devotees of Lord Ram that they will be able to celebrate next Diwali in Ayodhya. He said that the construction of Ram Temple will commence soon and it will be complete by next Diwali in October. He said, "The next Diwali will be celebrated in the newly constructed temple." He also assured that everything needed for the construction of the Ram temple was ready. Emphasising that there is no need to make a new law he said that the Narasimha Rao government had issued an affidavit to the Supreme Court which stated that the land will be given to Hindus if it is proven that there was a temple at the place. He said, "it was just the matter of attaching it like the Swami Narayan Mandir". Claiming that the existence of the temple was already proven, he was confident of winning the case. He further said that although they can bring the law, it was not needed. He also said that the Sunni Waqf Board has nothing for rebuttal. Swamy has presented an additional argument that offering prayers in that land is the fundamental right of Hindus. Muslims do not have that right and they are just interested in the property.

Ram Mandir in Ayodhya will be built by Diwali, says Subramanian Swamy

<p>Former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav on Wednesday justified his order to open fire on kar sevaks marching on Ayodhya in 1990, and said that &quot;if more had to be killed for the country&#39;s unity, the security forces would have done it&quot;.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;Desh ki ekta ke liye aur bhi maarna padta toh suraksha bal maartey (&quot;if more had to be killed for the country&#39;s unity, the security forces would have done it),&quot; PTI quoted him as saying.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Mulayam said 28 kar sevaks had been killed in the firing in Ayodhya on October 30, 1990.&nbsp;</p>

<p>&quot;A number of Muslims had taken up arms saying if their place of worship ceased to exist, then what would remain in the country,&quot; PTI quoted him as saying as justification for his having saved the Babri Masjid.</p>

<p>Mulayam had been chief minister of Uttar Pradesh during the Ram Janmabhoomi movement spearheaded by the VHP.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The movement seeks to build a Ram temple at the site where the Babri Masjid stood, because its supporters believe it is the site of Lord Ram&#39;s birth.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The mosque was finally demolished on December 6, 1992.&nbsp;</p>

<p>By then, Kalyan Singh of the BJP was chief minister of Uttar Pradesh.&nbsp;</p>


Twently-eight kar sevaks had been killed in the firing in Ayodhya on October 30, 1990

Former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mulayam Singh Yadav on Wednesday justified his order to open fire on kar sevaks marching on Ayodhya in 1990, and said that "if more had to be killed for the country's unity, the security forces would have done it". "Desh ki ekta ke liye aur bhi maarna padta toh suraksha bal maartey ("if more had to be killed for the country's unity, the security forces would have done it)," PTI quoted him as saying. Mulayam said 28 kar sevaks had been killed in the firing in Ayodhya on October 30, 1990. "A number of Muslims had taken up arms saying if their place of worship ceased to exist, then what would remain in the country," PTI quoted him as saying as justification for his having saved the Babri Masjid. Mulayam had been chief minister of Uttar Pradesh during the Ram Janmabhoomi movement spearheaded by the VHP. The movement seeks to build a Ram temple at the site where the Babri Masjid stood, because its supporters believe it is the site of Lord Ram's birth. The mosque was finally demolished on December 6, 1992. By then, Kalyan Singh of the BJP was chief minister of Uttar Pradesh.

Mulayam Singh Yadav justifies police firing on kar sevaks in 1990

<p>Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravishankar, who has offered to mediate in the Ayodhya dispute, said he is meeting people and discussing the issue with them to find a solution.</p>

<p>The spiritual leader is in Pune to attend &#39;Swar Sammohini&#39;, a programme by RSS&#39; musical troupe. During the event, the spiritual leader shared the dais with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat.</p>

<p>After the event, when he was asked whether he held talks with Bhagwat over the Ayodhya issue, he told reporters, &quot;I came to attend the programme.&quot;</p>

<p>On finding an amicable solution to the Ram temple dispute, Ravishankar said, &quot;See all this does not happen immediately. We are meeting people and holding talks with them. We will see what happens.&quot;</p>

<p>Ravishankar is in the city as part of the three-day &#39;Anta Ranga&#39; programme organised by the Art of Living.</p>

<p>The spiritual leader&#39;s offer for mediating in the dispute has received a tepid and sceptical response from stakeholders on both sides, with the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) voicing reservations about his role.</p>

<p>A day before visiting Ayodhya earlier this week, Ravishankar met Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath but said he had no proposal yet to discuss with the stakeholders.</p>

<p>In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77-acre area at Ayodhya among Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Lord Ram Lalla.</p>

<p>The Supreme Court will hear the case on December 5, the eve the 25th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition.&nbsp;</p>


The spiritual leader is in Pune to attend 'Swar Sammohini', a programme by RSS' musical troupe. During the event, the spiritual leader shared the dais with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat

Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravishankar, who has offered to mediate in the Ayodhya dispute, said he is meeting people and discussing the issue with them to find a solution. The spiritual leader is in Pune to attend 'Swar Sammohini', a programme by RSS' musical troupe. During the event, the spiritual leader shared the dais with RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat. After the event, when he was asked whether he held talks with Bhagwat over the Ayodhya issue, he told reporters, "I came to attend the programme." On finding an amicable solution to the Ram temple dispute, Ravishankar said, "See all this does not happen immediately. We are meeting people and holding talks with them. We will see what happens." Ravishankar is in the city as part of the three-day 'Anta Ranga' programme organised by the Art of Living. The spiritual leader's offer for mediating in the dispute has received a tepid and sceptical response from stakeholders on both sides, with the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) voicing reservations about his role. A day before visiting Ayodhya earlier this week, Ravishankar met Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath but said he had no proposal yet to discuss with the stakeholders. In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had ruled a three-way division of the disputed 2.77-acre area at Ayodhya among Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Lord Ram Lalla. The Supreme Court will hear the case on December 5, the eve the 25th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition.

Meeting people and holding talks: Ravi Shankar on Ayodhya issue

<p>After <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sri-sri-ravi-shankar-meets-yogi-adityanath-to-discuss-ayodhya-issue-24246">meeting UP chief minister Adityanath, Sri Sri </a>Ravi Shankar met All India Muslim Personal Law Board(AIMPLB) members in Lucknow today in an attempt to find a solution to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.</p>

<p>Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met&nbsp;Maulana Khalid Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahali, a member of&nbsp;AIMPLB as both men resolved to solve the issue through dialogue.</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="et"><a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/UttarPradesh?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#UttarPradesh</a>: Sri Sri Ravi Shankar reaches Aishbagh Eidgah in <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/Lucknow?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#Lucknow</a> to meet AIMPLB&#39;s Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahali. <a href="https://t.co/yvl6Px9ngu">pic.twitter.com/yvl6Px9ngu</a></p>
&mdash; ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANINewsUP/status/931380682286174208?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 17, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>&quot;We want to follow the path of peace,&quot;&nbsp;Maulana Khalid said, adding,&quot;the dispute should be resolved through talks.&quot;</p>

<p>Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said dialogue&nbsp;is the only way to find a solution to the&nbsp;Babri Masjid issue.</p>

<p>&nbsp;&quot;All possibilities to solve the issue are open,&quot; Sri Sri Ravi Shankar told reporters after meeting&nbsp;AIMPLB members.</p>

<p>On Thursday, the Art of Living founder had visited Ayodhya and spoken to Iqbal Ansari, a litigant in the BabriMasjid case.</p>

<p>The spiritual leader had said mediation was a &quot;golden opportunity&quot; for both Hindus and Muslims to find a solution.</p>

<p><br />
&nbsp;</p>


The spiritual leader had said mediation was a "golden opportunity" for both Hindus and Muslims to find a solution.

After meeting UP chief minister Adityanath, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met All India Muslim Personal Law Board(AIMPLB) members in Lucknow today in an attempt to find a solution to the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met Maulana Khalid Maulana Khalid Rashid Firangi Mahali, a member of AIMPLB as both men resolved to solve the issue through dialogue. #UttarPradesh: Sri Sri Ravi Shankar reaches Aishbagh Eidgah in #Lucknow to meet AIMPLB's Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahali. pic.twitter.com/yvl6Px9ngu — ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) November 17, 2017 × "We want to follow the path of peace," Maulana Khalid said, adding,"the dispute should be resolved through talks." Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said dialogue is the only way to find a solution to the Babri Masjid issue. "All possibilities to solve the issue are open," Sri Sri Ravi Shankar told reporters after meeting AIMPLB members. On Thursday, the Art of Living founder had visited Ayodhya and spoken to Iqbal Ansari, a litigant in the BabriMasjid case. The spiritual leader had said mediation was a "golden opportunity" for both Hindus and Muslims to find a solution.

Babri dispute should be resolved through talks, says Maulana Khalid AIMPLB member

<p>Spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met with Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath on Wednesday morning.</p>

<p>The meeting was held at the residence of Yogi Adityanath in Lucknow.&nbsp;</p>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Sri Sri Ravi Shankar arrives at UP CM Yogi Adityanath&#39;s residence in Lucknow to meet him. <a href="https://t.co/yirpLTuW4l">pic.twitter.com/yirpLTuW4l</a></p>
&mdash; ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANINewsUP/status/930648256039698432?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 15, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
<p dir="ltr" lang="en">Sri Sri Ravi Shankar meets UP CM Yogi Adityanath at the latter&#39;s residence in Lucknow. <a href="https://t.co/7HJf42qEUk">pic.twitter.com/7HJf42qEUk</a></p>
&mdash; ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) <a href="https://twitter.com/ANINewsUP/status/930648770794196992?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 15, 2017</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">&times;</a></div>

<p>The meeting is set in the backdrop of <a href="http://www.wionews.com/india-news/sri-sri-ravishankar-to-visit-ayodhya-on-november-16-24086" target="_blank">Ayodhya issue</a>.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Art of Living founder had earlier said that he will be speaking to &quot;all stakeholders&quot; involved in the Ayodhya issue.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Amarnath Mishra, who is the interlocutor for the Ram temple issue had met with the spiritual leader&nbsp;last week, reports said.</p>

<p>On October 31st, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar had held talks with Shia Waqf Board and representatives of the Hindu Mahasabha.</p>

<p>The final hearing of the Ayodhya issue will begin in the Supreme Court on December 5th.</p>

<p>In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had accepted the disputed site in Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram. The Supreme Court had however suspended the judgement in 2011.</p>


The Art of Living founder had said earlier that he will be speaking to 'all stakeholders' involved in the Ayodhya issue?

Spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar met with Uttar Pradesh chief minister Yogi Adityanath on Wednesday morning. The meeting was held at the residence of Yogi Adityanath in Lucknow. Sri Sri Ravi Shankar arrives at UP CM Yogi Adityanath's residence in Lucknow to meet him. pic.twitter.com/yirpLTuW4l — ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) November 15, 2017 × Sri Sri Ravi Shankar meets UP CM Yogi Adityanath at the latter's residence in Lucknow. pic.twitter.com/7HJf42qEUk — ANI UP (@ANINewsUP) November 15, 2017 × The meeting is set in the backdrop of Ayodhya issue. The Art of Living founder had earlier said that he will be speaking to "all stakeholders" involved in the Ayodhya issue. Amarnath Mishra, who is the interlocutor for the Ram temple issue had met with the spiritual leader last week, reports said. On October 31st, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar had held talks with Shia Waqf Board and representatives of the Hindu Mahasabha. The final hearing of the Ayodhya issue will begin in the Supreme Court on December 5th. In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had accepted the disputed site in Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram. The Supreme Court had however suspended the judgement in 2011.

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar meets Yogi Adityanath to discuss Ayodhya issue

<p>Spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said today he will be visiting Ayodhya on November 16.</p>

<p>Speaking to reporters at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said he will be meeting Hindu Mahasabha members today.</p>

<p>&quot;Only dialogue can solve this issue,&quot; he said, adding,&quot;the conflict is driven by greed.&quot;</p>

<p>The Art of Living founder said he will be speaking to &quot;all stakeholders&quot; involved in the Ayodhya issue.</p>

<p>Amarnath Mishra, who is the interlocutor for the Ram temple issue had met with the spiritual leader&nbsp;last week, reports said.</p>

<p>On October 31st, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar had held talks with Shia Waqf Board and representatives of the Hindu Mahasabha.</p>

<p>The final hearing of the Ayodhya issue will begin in the Supreme Court on December 5th.</p>

<p>In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had accepted the disputed site in Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram. The Supreme Court had however suspended the judgement in 2011.</p>


Sri Sri said he will be meeting ?Hindu Mahasabha members today

Spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said today he will be visiting Ayodhya on November 16. Speaking to reporters at Jawaharlal Nehru University, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said he will be meeting Hindu Mahasabha members today. "Only dialogue can solve this issue," he said, adding,"the conflict is driven by greed." The Art of Living founder said he will be speaking to "all stakeholders" involved in the Ayodhya issue. Amarnath Mishra, who is the interlocutor for the Ram temple issue had met with the spiritual leader last week, reports said. On October 31st, Sri Sri Ravi Shankar had held talks with Shia Waqf Board and representatives of the Hindu Mahasabha. The final hearing of the Ayodhya issue will begin in the Supreme Court on December 5th. In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had accepted the disputed site in Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram. The Supreme Court had however suspended the judgement in 2011.

Sri Sri Ravi Shankar to visit Ayodhya on November 16

<p>The Supreme case has adjourned the Babri Masjid demolition case which involved examining&nbsp;the conspiracy charges against BJP leaders LK Advani, Murli M Joshi, Uma Bharti and others.</p>

<p>The apex court will take up the matter tomorrow.</p>

<p>India&#39;s top court had earlier refused to accept dropping of charges against senior BJP leader LK Advani and others in the Babri Masjid demolition case and had raised concern over delay in trial and favoured a joint trial of the accused.</p>

<p>There are two cases in the Babri demolition - one is against LK Advani and others who were on the dais at Ram Katha Kunj on December 6, 1992 when the demolition happened and the second case is against thousands of &quot;karsevaks&quot; (volunteers) who were in and around the structure. &nbsp;</p>

<p>The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), had challenged the May 21, 2010 verdict of the High Court which upheld a special CBI court verdict.</p>

<p>The special CBI court had ordered dropping of charges against Advani, Kalyan Singh, Uma Bharti, Vinay Katiyar and Murli Manohar Joshi.&nbsp;</p>

<p>The Babri Masjid was demolished allegedly by a group of karsevaks on December 6, 1992 in India&#39;s northern city of Ayodhya in the state of Uttar Pradesh. It was allegedly demolished at the behest of top Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) leaders, several cases have been lodged since then against various people including political outfits and BJP, VHP leaders.&nbsp;</p>

<p>Yesterday, India&#39;s apex court asked&nbsp;BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy to settle the Ayodhya issue through negotiations which would be agreed upon by all petitioners and respondents. The Chief Justice of India Jagdish Singh Khehar also offered to mediate the Ayodhya dispute.</p>

<p>The Supreme Court said if negotiations break down then it will intervene and appoint a mediator for a peaceful resolution. India&#39;s highest court added the Ayodhya dispute is a sensitive and sentimental issue and it is best that it is settled amicably.</p>

<p>Supreme Court asked Swamy to consult the parties and inform it about the decision on March 31.</p>

<p>(WION with inputs from agencies)</p>


India's top court had earlier refused to accept dropping of charges against LK Advani and others in the Babri Masjid demolition case

The Supreme case has adjourned the Babri Masjid demolition case which involved examining the conspiracy charges against BJP leaders LK Advani, Murli M Joshi, Uma Bharti and others. The apex court will take up the matter tomorrow. India's top court had earlier refused to accept dropping of charges against senior BJP leader LK Advani and others in the Babri Masjid demolition case and had raised concern over delay in trial and favoured a joint trial of the accused. There are two cases in the Babri demolition - one is against LK Advani and others who were on the dais at Ram Katha Kunj on December 6, 1992 when the demolition happened and the second case is against thousands of "karsevaks" (volunteers) who were in and around the structure. The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), had challenged the May 21, 2010 verdict of the High Court which upheld a special CBI court verdict. The special CBI court had ordered dropping of charges against Advani, Kalyan Singh, Uma Bharti, Vinay Katiyar and Murli Manohar Joshi. The Babri Masjid was demolished allegedly by a group of karsevaks on December 6, 1992 in India's northern city of Ayodhya in the state of Uttar Pradesh. It was allegedly demolished at the behest of top Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) leaders, several cases have been lodged since then against various people including political outfits and BJP, VHP leaders. Yesterday, India's apex court asked BJP Rajya Sabha MP Subramanian Swamy to settle the Ayodhya issue through negotiations which would be agreed upon by all petitioners and respondents. The Chief Justice of India Jagdish Singh Khehar also offered to mediate the Ayodhya dispute. The Supreme Court said if negotiations break down then it will intervene and appoint a mediator for a peaceful resolution. India's highest court added the Ayodhya dispute is a sensitive and sentimental issue and it is best that it is settled amicably. Supreme Court asked Swamy to consult the parties and inform it about the decision on March 31. (WION with inputs from agencies)

Babri Masjid demolition case: Supreme Court adjourns case till tomorrow

ayodhya

Ayodhya, News on Ayodhya, stories on Ayodhya, articles on Ayodhya, Ayodhya stories at Wion, Ayodhya news, Ayodhya latest news