Verdict not on the basis of faith or belief; case over property dispute: SC

The Supreme Court made it clear while pronouncing its judgment in the politically contentious Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid matter on Saturday that its decision was purely based on evidence and not on matters of belief or faith as it treated the case as a dispute over immovable property rather than a religious issue.

“In the present case, this Court was tasked with an adjudicatory task of unique dimension. The dispute is over immovable property. The court does not decide title on the basis of faith or belief but on the basis of evidence,” a five-judge Constitution bench of the apex court headed by Chief Justice of India Justice Ranjan Gogoi said in a unanimous judgment.

As it decreed title of the disputed 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya to Ram Lalla, ordering an alternative site of five acres be provided to the Sunni Waqf Board for construction of a mosque, the court said that in deciding title to the disputed property, it has applied settled principles of evidence to adjudicate upon which party has established a claim to the immovable property.

Emphasising upon evidence of possession to settle the title claims on the disputed site, the judgment, signed by Justices S.A. Bobde, D.Y. Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S. Abdul Nazeer, besides Gogoi, said there is a clear evidence to indicate that the worship by Hindus in the outer courtyard continued unimpeded in spite of a grill brick wall in 1857.

“Their possession of the outer courtyard stands established together with the incidents attaching to their control of it,” the judgment read.

The court said the Muslims have offered no evidence to indicate that they were in exclusive possession of the inner structure prior to 1857 since the date of the construction in the 16th century even as it said that after the setting up of the grill brick wall, the structure of the mosque continued to exist and there is evidence to indicate that Namaz was offered in its precincts.

As it sought to provide relief to the Muslim side by ruling that they be provided an alternative site to build a mosque, the court said that the community has been wrongly deprived of a mosque which had been constructed well over 450 years ago.

The court said that on a balance of probabilities, the evidence in respect of the possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence provided by the Muslim side. However, it said the Muslim side had to be provided relief by way of an alternative land since they were dispossessed upon the desecration of the mosque in 1949 which was ultimately destroyed on December 6, 1992.

“There was no abandonment of the mosque by the Muslims. This Court in the exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution must ensure that a wrong committed must be remedied. Justice would not prevail if the Court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims who have been deprived of the structure of the mosque through means which should not have been employed in a secular nation committed to the rule of law,” the court said.

The land to be given to the Muslim side will be provided by the Central government either out of the acquired land around the disputed site or by the Uttar Pradesh government within the city of Ayodhya.

Rejecting the order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter, the court said the three-way division of the land will not serve the interest of either party or secure a lasting sense of peace or tranquility.