In a big development in the Ayodhya case, the Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi on Thursday told the petitioners to finish their arguments within October 18. The CJI said this during the 32nd day of hearing in the Ayodhya case on Thursday. The CJI said that since the Supreme Court will be closed for Diwali vacation for a week at the end of October, it needed to be ensured that the arguments were completed before the holidays begin. The CJI added that the parties in the case will not be granted a single additional day after October 18 to finish their arguments.
'Not a day more will be given after October 18,' CJI Ranjan Gogoi said. 'It will be miraculous if we can deliver the judgment in just four weeks," he added. Sources say that CJI wants the arguments finished before the said date as he will retire on November 17, 2019. He also said that if the arguments finish by October 18, the judges will be able to write down the judgment in its finality before the CJI's retirement in November.
The Muslim parties on Wednesday attacked in the Supreme Court, the 2003 report of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) which had found that a structure pre-existed the Babri Masjid, saying it does not provide a "verifiable conclusion" and is mostly based on "inferences". The top court was told by the Muslim parties that the report, which was commissioned by the Allahabad High Court to ascertain whether there existed any structure or temple at the disputed site, was an opinion. A 5-judge bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi was told by senior advocate Meenakshi Arora that the report, which has 10 chapters attributed to an author, had a summary that was not attributed to anybody. She said the ASI team comprised 14 members, that was initially headed by BR Mani and later by Hari Manjhi did not hold any meetings among themselves to finalize the summary.
The Supreme Court on Monday said that It would be difficult to question the faith of Hindus with regard to Ayodhya as the birthplace of Lord Ram as even some Muslim witnesses have termed it as sacred for the Hindus as Mecca is for them. The 5-judge Constitution bench was questioning senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for the Muslim parties, on whether the divinity and the "exact form" of an idol or a deity were necessary to hold that they have "juristic personality". "Even Muslim witnesses (during the trial) have said that Ayodhya to Hindus is as sacred as the Mecca is for them. It will be difficult to rebut the belief of the Hindus," said the bench which also comprised Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer.