Supreme Court declines to refer the Ayodhya dispute to a larger bench in a majority judgment

In a crucial judgment, a three-Judge Bench of the Supreme Court has ruled that the Ram Janambhoomi case will not be referred to a larger bench. Justice Abdul Nazeer disagreed with the majority opinion.

Breaking: Ayodhya Case Need not Be Referred to larger Bench: Majority Judgment

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 27, 2018

The judgment was in connection with the 1994 Ismail Faruqui verdict which dealt with the acquisition of religious place by the state. The verdict had concluded that offering Namaz at the Mosque was not integral to Islam as long as the Masjid did not have any particular significance in Islam.

Justice Nazeer, the judge who dissented, asserted that a constitutional bench is required to answer whether a mosque is an integral part of Islam. He was of the opinion that contentious observations made in the Faruqui verdict have influenced the Allahabad High Court’s decision in the Ayodhya dispute.

Justice Nazeer holds that contentious observations in Faruqui have influenced the Allahabad High Court judgment in the present title dispute

— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 27, 2018

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhawan, representing a litigant from the Muslim side, had argued for the reopening of the 1994 verdict and had pleaded for the entire case t be referred to a larger constitution bench. He had pleaded, ” A mosque is forever, it does not lose its significance and remains a place of worship even after it is demolished.”

The bench also clarified that observations in the Faruqui verdict will not impact the title dispute in the Ayodhya dispute. The bench stated that the Court will pronounce the order tomorrow on whether the Faruqui verdict requires reconsideration by a larger bench.