25% OFF on all LCI Courses. Offer valid till 5th Oct. Use Code: DUS25
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More



Allahabad High Court verdict on Ayodhya title suits is released.The disputed land in Ayodhya would be divided into three parts, one for the Hindus, one for the Muslims and one for the Nirmohi Akhara.




Delivering their verdict that all of India has remained glued to, the three-judge special bench of the Allahabad high court, comprising Justice S U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D V Sharma made me to extract many positives and negatives as under :




1.      This Judgment is Unique that it could satisfy many sections of the society

2.      Panic created on the minds of everycitizen by the State was put to cold storage.

3.      It prevailed the Rule of  Law giving adequate scope for appeal to the dissatisfied.

4.       Despite the issue being very sensitive it drew support from all political parties.

5.      Throughout the process of litigation it helped to identify secular and non-secular forces in the country

6.      It made a strong statement to all political parties who play with religious sentiments to win votes. No party would play this card any more in the future while contesting any elections.

7.      It drew a rare unity amongst political parties to make the communities feel that they are neither winners nor loosers.

8.      Enhanced the global image of the country by establishing Secularism in the true letter and spirit.

9.      Judicially initiated Reconciliation efforts by the parties to go ahead for amicable settlement.

10.  Above all, it showed to the world that India is the only country where Temples and Mosques could exist together side by side.

  1. Judgment is arrived purely on the basis of evidences supplied by Archaeological Survey of India which is not an independent autonomous body like CAG or Election Commission. Aggrieved parties can legally disprove such material or historical evidences.
  2. Mythological factors and religious belief were given much weightage to  draw conclusion.
  3. Exceeded its Judiciary purview to substantiate the birth of God or existence of Rama.
  4. It says that Masjid was not constructed after demolition of temple and only ruins were there over which Babar made the mosque. How it failed to understand the fact such Ruins never fell from heaven?
  5. Sets unwarranted precedent as to draw conclusion and award share in such a proportion without any claim from the litigants.
  6. When it could dismiss the Waqf Board title suit on the grounds of limitation how can it allocate 1/3rd share to Muslims setting filthy precedents.
  7. Normally unanimity is expected from the Bench containing three judges but Judgment was a three-way traffic again setting a bad precedent.
  8. In the name of respecting religious sentiments of either communities it gave too much importance for unscientific principles.
  9. It was silent on the criminal acts committed by the Kar Sevaks and political parties responsible  on 06.12.1992 for demolishing the Babri Masjid.
  10. Above all, it was performing the role of Kangroo Court in drawing conclusions on the basis of Religious Faith and belief .

Layman’s Original News VERSUS Lawman’s  Personal Views

"Loved reading this piece by Parthasarathi Loganathan?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"

Tags :

Category Others, Other Articles by - Parthasarathi Loganathan 


Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query