Babri Masjid demolition: A timeline of events

Agencies
September 30, 2020

The verdict by a special court in the Babri Masjid demolition case comes 28 years after kar sevaks razed the 16th century mosque and almost a year after the Supreme Court settled the land case in favour of a Ram temple at the disputed Ayodhya site.

A timeline:

- 1528: Babri Masjid built by Mir Baqi, commander of Mughal emperor Babur.

- 1885: Mahant Raghubir Das files plea in Faizabad district court seeking permission to build a canopy outside the disputed structure. Court rejects the plea.

- 1949: Idols of Ram Lalla placed under central dome outside the disputed structure.

- 1950: Gopal Simla Visharad files suit in Faizabad district court for right to worship the idols of Ram Lalla.

- Paramahansa Ramachandra Das files suit for continuation of worship and keeping the idols.

- 1959: Nirmohi Akhara files suit seeking possession of the site.

- 1961: UP Sunni Central Waqf Board files suit for possession of the site.

- Feb 1986: Local court orders the government to open the site to Hindu worshippers.

- Aug 1989: Allahabad HC orders status quo in respect of the disputed structure.

- Dec 6, 1992: Babri Masjid demolished.

- Dec 1992: Two FIRs filed in the case. One against unknown kar sevaks for demolition of the mosque. The other names BJP leaders L K Advani, M M Joshi and others for allegedly giving communal speeches before the demolition.

- Oct 1993: CBI files composite charge sheet accusing Advani and others of conspiracy.

- May 2001: Special CBI court drops proceedings against Advani, Joshi, Uma Bharti, Bal Thackeray and others.

- Nov 2004: CBI challenges before the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court the dropping of proceedings against BJP leaders on technical grounds. Court issues notices.

- May 2010: High court dismisses plea. Says no merit in CBI's revision petition.

- Sep 2010: In a 2:1 majority, HC rules three-way division of disputed area between Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

- May 2011: SC stays HC verdict on Ayodhya land dispute.

- Feb 2011: CBI moves Supreme Court against high court order in the mosque demolition case.

- Mar 2017: SC indicates it may consider reviving conspiracy charge against the BJP leaders in Babri Masjid demolition case.

- SC suggests fresh attempts to resolve Ayodhya dispute.

- Apr: SC favours time-bound completion of trial in the case and reserves order on CBI's plea.

- SC restores criminal conspiracy charge against leaders including Advani, Joshi and Uma Bharti and clubs the trials in the matters pending against VIPs and kar sevaks.

- Nov 2019: SC grants entire disputed land in Ayodhya to deity Ram Lalla, directs govt to allot an alternative five-acre plot to Muslims to build mosque.

- Aug 2020: PM Narendra Modi conducts 'bhoomi pujan' in Ayodhya, launches construction of Ram temple.

- Supreme Court extends by a month the deadline for completion of trial in the Babri Masjid demolition case.

Sep 30: Special Judge S K Yadav delivers judgment in the mosque demolition case, all accused acquitted.

Comments

Srihari
 - 
Thursday, 8 Oct 2020

What about before 1528,
where is the illustration,
what about the demolition that took place by Babur....& his followers...

you cheat paid media u act so cheap...

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 18,2024

Advisors to US President-elect Donald Trump have instructed his allies and associates to refrain from using the inflammatory language they previously employed when discussing issues related to migrants and the deportation of asylum seekers, in a bid to avoid “looking like Nazis.”

US media reports said that Trump’s associates had been asked to stop using the word “camps” to describe potential facilities that would be used to accommodate migrants rounded up in deportation operations across the country.

The reports said the US president-elect’s allies had been ordered to stave off such charged terms as they would bring to mind “Nazis,” and be used against Trump.

“I have received some guidance to avoid terms, like ‘camps,’ that can be twisted and used against the president, yes,” one Trump ally told American monthly magazine Rolling Stone.

“Apparently, some people think it makes us look like Nazis.”

The presidential advisers also cautioned surrogates and allies to keep racist terms, which have dogged Trump’s campaign, out of their remarks.

They said with Trump’s heated rhetoric that used to compare undocumented immigrants to “animals” and his slight that they are “poisoning the blood of our country,” detractors did not need to reach too far to find parallels to Nazi Germany.

Stephen Miller, who Trump tapped to be his deputy chief of staff of policy, specifically used the word “camps” to describe holding facilities that he hoped the military could put together for immigrants.

Tom Homan, who served as the acting director of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and is chosen by Trump to be in charge of the US borders, was no stranger to such language.

“It’s not gonna be a mass sweep of neighborhoods,” he said in an interview earlier this week. “It’s not gonna be building concentration camps. I’ve read it all. It’s ridiculous.”

Becoming a little more forthright about the new government’s aggressive deportation plans, Homan likened the early days of the Trump administration to the initial invasion of Iraq in 2003.

“I got three words for them – shock and awe,” he said. “You’re going to see us take this country back.”

Trump made immigration a central element of his 2024 presidential campaign but unlike his first run, which was mainly focused on building a border wall, he has shifted his attention to interior enforcement and the removal of undocumented immigrants already in the United States.

People close to the US president and his aides are laying the groundwork for expanding detention facilities to fulfill his mass deportation campaign promise.

The businessman-turned-politician deported more than 1.5 million people during his first term.

The figure do not include the millions of people turned away at the border under a Covid-era policy enacted by Trump and used during most of Biden’s term.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 13,2024

buldozerjustice.jpg

New Delhi: The Supreme Court took a firm stance on ‘bulldozer justice’ today, affirming that the Executive cannot bypass the Judiciary and that the legal process must not prejudge the guilt of an accused. In a significant judgment, the bench led by Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan set new guidelines for demolition practices, responding to petitions challenging the controversial bulldozer actions taken against individuals accused of crimes.

The rise of this practice, termed 'bulldozer justice,' has seen authorities in various states demolish what they claim to be illegal structures belonging to accused individuals. However, multiple petitions questioned the legality and fairness of this approach, bringing the matter before the court.

Justice Gavai highlighted that owning a home is a cherished goal for many families, and an essential question was whether the Executive should have the authority to strip individuals of their shelter. “In a democracy, the rule of law protects citizens from arbitrary actions by the state. The criminal justice system must not assume guilt,” stated the bench, underscoring that due process is a fundamental right under the Constitution.

On the principle of separation of powers, the bench reinforced that the Judiciary alone holds adjudicatory powers and that the Executive cannot overstep these boundaries. Justice Gavai remarked, “When the state demolishes a home purely because its resident is accused of a crime, it violates the doctrine of separation of powers.”

The court issued a strong warning about accountability, stating that public officials who misuse their power or act arbitrarily must face consequences. Justice Gavai observed that selectively demolishing one property while ignoring similar cases suggests that the aim might be to penalize rather than enforce legality. “For most citizens, a house is the product of years of labor and dreams. Taking it away must be an action of last resort, thoroughly justified,” he said.

In its directives under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Supreme Court established new demolition guidelines. These include:

Mandatory Show-Cause Notice: No demolition should occur without first issuing a show-cause notice. The person served has a minimum of 15 days or the duration stated in local laws to respond.

Transparency of Notice Content: The notice must include specifics about the alleged unauthorized construction, the nature of the violation, and the rationale for demolition.

Hearing and Final Order: Authorities are required to hear the response of the affected individual before issuing a final order. The homeowner will have 15 days to address the issue, with demolition proceeding only if no stay order is obtained from an appellate authority.

Contempt Proceedings: Any breach of these guidelines would lead to contempt proceedings. Officials who disregard these norms will be personally accountable for restitution, with costs deducted from their salaries.

Additionally, the court mandated that all municipal bodies establish digital portals within three months, displaying show-cause notices and final orders on unauthorized structures to ensure public transparency and accountability.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
November 27,2024

Mangaluru: A five-year-long pursuit of justice continues for several youths from Dakshina Kannada who fell victim to a fraudulent food delivery job scam in Kuwait. The victims, lured by promises of lucrative overseas employment, now find themselves entangled in legal battles and financial ruin.

In a recent development, the Enforcement Directorate (ED) summoned the victims to its Mangaluru office as part of the ongoing investigation. The case, which dates back to May 28, 2019, was initially registered at the Mangaluru North police station based on a complaint filed by Usman, a resident of Jalligudde. His brother, Aboobakkar Siddique, was among the 34 victims duped by Manikya Associates, a recruitment agency operated by Prasad Shetty.

According to the complaint, the victims were promised jobs as food delivery executives in Kuwait with a salary of ₹40,000 per month. “I paid ₹80,000 to the agent and ended up spending seven harrowing months in Kuwait without any salary,” shared a victim who now works in construction. Another victim, now employed as a driver, said, “I dreamt of working abroad to support my family. I even pledged jewelry to pay the fees, but it took me years to recover financially.”

The victims allege that they were left stranded in Kuwait in January 2019 after completing all formalities. With no jobs and mounting expenses, their ordeal lasted seven months. They were eventually repatriated with the help of Indian expats and the Embassy of India in Kuwait, just two months after the complaint was filed.

The ED investigation is reportedly progressing, and victims said they were assured that their payments to the agent would be refunded soon. An ED official confirmed that efforts to ensure justice are ongoing.

For these youths, the pain of shattered dreams and financial losses has lingered for years, with many still struggling to rebuild their lives. As they await justice, their plight serves as a cautionary tale about the perils of fraudulent recruitment schemes.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.