New Delhi, September 26: Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi, who is heading the five-judge bench adjudicating upon the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, has reiterated the October 18 deadline. The CJI on Thursday asked the counsel of all parties involved in the case to finish off their arguments by the said date. Ram Temple Construction Will Begin From December 6 in Ayodhya, Says BJP MP Sakshi Maharaj.
With this deadline reiterated by the court, legal experts are of the view that the apex court is likely to declare the verdict in November, when CJI Gogoi is scheduled to demit the Office. The judgement, in all likelihood, could be pronounced before the incumbent Chief Justice's retirement, said an expert who has been closely tracking the Ayodhya case proceedings.
Reports said the CJI is not in favour of allocating even a single day of hearing beyond the date of October 18. If the counsel wants, the apex court could conduct an hour of extra hearing per day or hear the proceedings on Saturday as well leading upto the deadline.
Update by ANI:
Ayodhya land dispute case: Supreme Court said that it cannot give an extra day after October 18 for parties to complete their submissions in the case. Today is the 32nd day of hearing in the case. pic.twitter.com/Bj7H67fXrO
— ANI (@ANI) September 26, 2019
In a major development in the Ayodhya case, the Muslim side on Wednesday told the bench that facts "do not prove" that the disputed site is the birthplace of Lord Ram. The submission comes days after the apex court said it would consider the matter as a case of title suit.
With the Hindu side reiterating their belief that Lord Ram was born at the disputed side before the court, the Muslim Personal Law Board has attempted to counter their claim. "Ram Chabutra is not the birthplace of Lord Ram," Zafaryab Jilani, lawyer of the Muslim side, told the CJI Gogoi-headed bench.
Senior advocate Meenakshi Arora, who is also representing the Muslim side, raked up the concern over the accuracy of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report which pointed towards the existence of a structure beneath the mosque. The 2003 report does not provide a verifiable conclusion and is mostly based on inferences, she told the bench.