Key highlights of Ayodhya verdict

After hearing the Ayodhya land dispute for a period of 40 days at a stretch, a five-judge bench of the Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi Saturday said the faith of the Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the site was undisputed. Delivering a unanimous judgment, the Court backed the construction of a Ram temple by a trust at the disputed site in Ayodhya, and ruled that an alternative five-acre plot must be found for a mosque in Ayodhya.

Here are some of the key takeaways from the landmark judgment in the Ayodhya case:

1. The Apex court has granted the entire 2.77 acre of disputed land in Ayodhya to deity Ram Lalla.
2. The Supreme Court has directed the Centre and Uttar Pradesh government to allot an alternative 5 acre land to the Muslim litigants at a prominent place to build a mosque.
3. The court has asked Centre to consider granting some kind of representation to Nirmohi Akhara in setting up of trust. Nirmohi Akhara was the third party in the Ayodhya dispute.
4. The Court dismissed the plea of Nirmohi Akhara, which was seeking control of the entire disputed land, arguing that they are the custodian of the land.
5. The Court has directed the Central government to set up a trust within three months for the construction of the Ram temple at the disputed site where Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992.
6. The Court observed that the underlying structure below the disputed site at Ayodhya was not an Islamic structure. That said, the ASI has not established whether a temple was demolished to build a mosque.
7. The Court also said that the Hindus consider the disputed site as the birthplace of Lord Ram – even before the dispute came to fore.
8. The bench said that the faith of the Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the disputed site where the Babri Masjid once stood cannot be disputed.
9. The top Court also said that the 1992 demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid mosque was a violation of its order.
10. The Court said that the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board has failed to establish its case in Ayodhya dispute case and Hindus have established their case that they were in possession of outer courtyard of the disputed site.