In
M Siddiq (D) Thr Lrs v. Mahant Suresh Das & Ors, (India Supreme Court, Nov. 9, 2019), in an opinion that spans 1,045 pages, the Supreme Court of India ruled on a decades-old dispute over a piece of land claimed by both Hindus and Muslims.
BBC summarized the decision:
India's Supreme Court has ruled that the disputed holy site in Ayodhya in northern India should be given to Hindus who want to build a temple there.
The case, which has been bitterly contested for decades by Hindus and Muslims, centres on the ownership of the land in Uttar Pradesh state.
At the centre of the row is the 16th Century Babri mosque which was demolished by Hindu mobs in 1992, sparking riots that killed nearly 2,000 people.
Muslims would get another plot of land to construct a mosque, the court said.
In its opinion, the court explained:
The disputed land forms part of the village of Kot Rama Chandra or, as it is otherwise called, Ramkot at Ayodhya, in Pargana Haveli Avadh, of Tehsil Sadar in the District of Faizabad. An old structure of a mosque existed at the site until 6 December 1992. The site has religious significance for the devotees of Lord Ram, who believe that Lord Ram was born at the disputed site. For this reason, the Hindus refer to the disputed site as Ram Janmabhumi or Ram Janmasthan (i.e. birth-place of Lord Ram). The Hindus assert that there existed at the disputed site an ancient temple dedicated to Lord Ram, which was demolished upon the conquest of the Indian sub-continent by Mughal Emperor Babur. On the other hand, the Muslims contended that the mosque was built by or at the behest of Babur on vacant land. Though the significance of the site for the Hindus is not denied, it is the case of the Muslims that there exists no proprietary claim of the Hindus over the disputed property.
Reuters has more extensive reporting on the decision.
[Thanks to Scott Mange for the lead.]
