In the Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid Land Dispute case, the Hindu parties said in the Supreme Court on Tuesday that during the hearing they never argued that it spoils the communal harmony and peace. . The Hindu side claimed that their rivals claim to have a communal aspect.
He also called this argument of Muslim parties unfair and unfortunate that the archaeological report can be destroyed. He said that now he is alleging that the wall which came out in the excavation was of Idgah.
Questioning the arguments, senior counsel for Ram Lala said that it meant that the Mughal ruler Babur had come and built Idgah to demolish the mosque. It also opposed his old stand that the mosque was built on empty land.
Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan, on behalf of Ram Lala, said, “During the hearing, he (the Muslim side) made unnecessary comments and we have never made any argument which is against communal peace and harmony.” ‘It is unfortunate that the (Sunni) Waqf Board presented the Allahabad High Court decision as a’ known conjecture ‘.’ ‘
Rajiv Dhawan, counsel for the Muslim parties, objected to this, saying, “I did not paint it, but the judges themselves have portrayed it as a known conjecture.”
Dhawan said, “We avoid arguments that threaten communal divisions.” We said that the activities were illegal and did not say anything about communal division. ”
Ayodhya case hearing on 35th day
There was a sharp reaction from the Muslim side on the arguments of the Hindu parties. During the debate on the arguments, there was a sharp argument between the senior lawyers of both sides.
He was pleading before a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi (CJI Ranjan Gogoi). The bench completed the 35th day hearing on this sensitive matter.
‘No comment against communal peace and harmony’
Read More :- Big statement of Sakshi Maharaj