Can ordinary citizens counter this backward march? Can peace activists ensure that the two communities retain their bonds? Do they have a choice, asks Jyoti Punwani.
The Supreme Court of India has extended its stay on a court-monitored survey of the Shahi Idgah Mosque complex in Mathura, which is located adjacent to the Krishna Janmabhoomi temple. The court deferred the hearing on a plea against the survey to April 1, while the interim order staying the survey will continue to operate. The Hindu side claims that the mosque complex holds signs of a temple that once existed at the site, while the Muslim side contends that the lawsuits filed by the Hindu litigants violate the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act of 1991.
Owaisi said the CBI should appeal against the judgment "to protect its independence."
Asserting that he prays regularly, the CJI said, "Believe me, if you have faith, God will always find a way."
As a judge of special Central Bureau of Investigation court, Yadav had on September 30, 2020 acquitted all the 32 accused, including BJP veterans LK Advani, M M Joshi, Uma Bharti and Kalyan Singh, in the case of demolition of Babri mosque in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992.
Congress MP Mohammad Jawed and AIMIM president Asaduddin Owaisi have challenged the validity of the Waqf (Amendment) Bill, 2025 in the Supreme Court, arguing that it violates constitutional provisions. The petitions claim the bill imposes arbitrary restrictions on Waqf properties and their management, undermining the religious autonomy of the Muslim community. They also allege that the bill discriminates against Muslims by imposing restrictions not present in the governance of other religious endowments. The bill was passed in the Rajya Sabha and Lok Sabha, with the petitioners arguing that it introduces limitations on the creation of Waqfs based on the duration of one's religious practice, mandates inclusion of non-Muslim members in Waqf administrative bodies, and shifts key administrative functions to government officials, thereby diluting the autonomy of Waqf management.
'Rather than assuaging the feelings of the Hindus accommodated in schools and hospitals, she calls a meeting of imams and tries to assuage them.'
The Allahabad high court on Monday deferred till October 31 the hearing of an appeal challenging the acquittal of all 32 accused, including former deputy prime minister LK Advani and the then Uttar Pradesh chief minister Kalyan Singh, in the Babri mosque demolition case.
Challenging the verdict is a deterrent to future peace and harmony and a socially irresponsible act, argues Vivek Gumaste.
The Supreme Court of India is scheduled to hear a batch of petitions challenging the validity of certain provisions of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which prohibits lawsuits to reclaim a place of worship or change its character from what prevailed on August 15, 1947. The pleas, including one filed by Ashwini Upadhyay, argue that these provisions violate the right to judicial remedy and create an arbitrary cut-off date. The matter will be heard in the backdrop of several ongoing cases related to places of worship, including the Gyanvapi Mosque in Varanasi and the Shahi Idgah Mosque in Mathura. The Muslim side has cited the 1991 law to argue that such suits are not maintainable. The Supreme Court had previously sought the Centre's response to Upadhyay's petition, which alleged that the law creates an "arbitrary and irrational retrospective cut-off date" for maintaining the character of places of worship.
The proceedings in the case at the Central Bureau of Investigation court in Lucknow ended on Tuesday with the advocates for some of 32 accused presenting their oral arguments.
The Allahabad high court will hear Wednesday a plea against the acquittal of all 32 accused, including Bharatiya Janata Party veterans L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi, in the Babri mosque demolition case.
Veteran Bharatiya Janata Party leaders L K Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi reacted to the court acquitting them in the Babri Masjid demolition case.
Top BJP leaders hailed the special CBI court order acquitting all the accused and described it as a victory of truth and justice.
The Act prohibits conversion of any place of worship and provides for the maintenance of the religious character of any place of worship as it existed on August 15, 1947.
'What is at stake is not one mosque or temple, it is the question of the principle of secularism which is part of the basic structure of the Constitution as declared even by the Supreme Court of India.'
Samajwadi Party leader and Kairana MP Iqra Choudhary has moved the Supreme Court seeking effective implementation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This move comes amidst several petitions challenging the law's validity, including those filed by the Akhil Bhartiya Sant Samiti and lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay. The Supreme Court, in December 2022, had restrained all courts from examining fresh suits and passing interim orders in pending cases seeking to reclaim religious places. The Act aims to maintain the religious character of places of worship as they existed on August 15, 1947, but the dispute relating to Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid at Ayodhya was kept out of its purview. The court has listed Choudhary's plea with other pending pleas for February 17.
The Mathura Shahi Masjid Eidgah Committee has approached the Supreme Court, requesting the court to prevent the central government from filing a response to a petition challenging the Places of Worship Act's constitutional validity. The committee accuses the BJP-led government of intentionally delaying its response. The court had previously issued a notice to the government in March 2021, but the government has yet to submit its reply despite numerous opportunities. The committee argues that the government's delay is intended to obstruct those opposing the challenge to the Places of Worship Act from filing their own responses. The petition also states that the pleas challenging the law's validity are scheduled for hearing on February 17, and closing the government's right to respond would serve justice. The Supreme Court previously issued a ruling in December 2022 that stopped courts from entertaining new lawsuits or issuing interim or final orders regarding the reclaiming of religious places, particularly mosques and dargahs. The ruling halted proceedings in 18 lawsuits filed by Hindu groups seeking surveys to confirm the original religious character of 10 mosques, including the Gyanvapi Masjid in Varanasi, the Shahi Idgah Masjid in Mathura, and the Shahi Jama Masjid in Sambhal. This decision was made in response to six petitions, including one filed by lawyer Ashwini Upadhyay, challenging various provisions of the Places of Worship Act. The 1991 law prohibits the conversion of places of worship and guarantees the preservation of their existing religious character as it stood on August 15, 1947. Notably, the dispute regarding the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid in Ayodhya was excluded from this law. There are also several cross-petitions advocating for a strict enforcement of the 1991 law to uphold communal harmony and maintain the current status of mosques that Hindu groups seek to reclaim, claiming they were temples before being destroyed by invaders.
'He failed to foresee that the campaign of hatred need not be continuous; a sporadic, scattered campaign is enough.' 'What was important is to keep the pot boiling, not let it overflow like happened during the masjid-mandir days,' notes Saisuresh Sivaswamy.
Iqbal Ansari, one of the main plaintiffs who fought for the right of the community over the disputed land, says Muslims in Ayodhya won't be satisfied if the Sunni Waqf Board accepts the five acres in Dhannipur.
A bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar also indicated that it may not take up the pending scheduled petitions, heard earlier by a three-judge bench, during the day as it was sitting in a combination of two judges.
The court is conducting the trial of accused persons, including BJP leaders L K Advani, M M Joshi, Uma Bharti and others.
Nazir Ahmed Wani, the main accused in the 1993 Deoband bomb blasts, has been arrested in Srinagar after evading capture for 31 years. Wani, wanted for his involvement in the bomb attacks, was arrested by a joint operation of the Uttar Pradesh Anti-Terrorism Squad (ATS) and local police. The blasts occurred during communal violence in Deoband following the demolition of the Babri Masjid in 1992.
The Babri mosque demolition trial is presently at the stage of the recording of statements of 32 accused in the case under Section 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure during which they also get an opportunity to refute the prosecution evidence against them.
Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud on Monday said there was 'nothing wrong' in Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to his residence on Ganpati Puja and underscored the need for a 'sense of maturity in political sphere' on such issues.
The court also observed that late Vishwa Hindu Parishad leader Ashok Singhal wanted to save the structure because Ram idols were inside.
His five-year rule saw the Babri Masjid demolition, the rise of the saffron forces and also the country being placed firmly on a new economic path, away from the Nehru years of public sector socialism.
The Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC) demanded the Central Bureau of Investigation and the Centre to move applications in the Allahabad High Court for daily hearing to expedite trial and judgement in the mosque demolition case.
Following is the chronology of events in the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition case.
The Supreme Court of India will hear a plea from the mosque management committee challenging an order rejecting its petition in the Krishna Janmabhoomi-Shahi Idgah dispute in Mathura, Uttar Pradesh on January 15. The Allahabad High Court had rejected the mosque committee's plea, stating that the religious character of the Shahi Idgah mosque needed to be determined. The case involves claims that the mosque was built after the demolition of a temple, a claim disputed by the mosque committee. The Supreme Court will now decide on the maintainability of the mosque committee's plea.
He hinted that the same hue and cry is not made about 1984 riots not being in textbooks.
'While suppression of information is acceptable for the government, the Opposition's efforts at pinning the government and its leaders is labeled anti-national,' points out Nilanjan Mukhopadhyay.
Questions are being raised on the future of the Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance (INDIA) as differences among its constituents come to the fore and several parties call for serious introspection by the Congress after a string of debilitating electoral losses.
A generation has passed and the demolition appears to be a story of an era gone by, says Sharat Pradhan, who shares his experience as a witness in court in the Babri Masjid demolition case. On the 25th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition, we republish this 2011 special.
Senior advocate Aishwarya Bhati, appearing for Uttar Pradesh, told the bench that they have complied with the top court's direction and extended the tenure of the special judge till he delivers the judgment in the Ayodhya demolition case.
The statement of the 86-year-old leader was recorded in the court of Special Judge S K Yadav through video conference.
'Unless Justice Chandrachud's judgment is (over)turned, there is no end to it.'
From the kind of food to the art which will be displayed at the museum, historian Pushpesh Pant shares his vision.
The EC on Saturday had issued a show-cause notice to Thakur, an accused in the 2008 Malegaon bomb blast accused currently out on bail, over her remark made during an interview to a news channel.
A local court in Ajmer has issued notices to the dargah committee, the Ministry of Minority Affairs, and the Archaeological Survey of India on a plea seeking to declare the shrine of Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti a temple. The petition, filed in September, has sparked a heated debate, with politicians and community leaders weighing in on the potentially volatile issue. The dargah committee has declined to comment, but the Anjuman Syed Zadgan, a body representing the caretakers of the dargah, described the petition as a deliberate attempt to fracture society along communal lines. The petition comes just days after four people were killed in Sambhal, Uttar Pradesh, following a local court ordering survey of a Mughal-era shrine. The Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991, which fixed August 15, 1947, as the cut-off date for status quo on the character of religious places, is at the centre of much of the debate. Several politicians, including Union minister Giriraj Singh and PDP chief Mehbooba Mufti, have weighed in on the issue. The Communist Party of India (Marxist) has called the civil court's decision to entertain the petition unwarranted and has asked the Supreme Court to immediately intervene.
