Ayodhya: SC queries Muslim parties over Nirmohi Akahara's right as devotee over disputed land

The Supreme Court Wednesday asked Muslim parties whether they will agree that Nirmohi Akahara has been in possession of the outer courtyard of the disputed Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri masjid land at Ayodhya as they have accepted the Akahara to be a devotee of Ram Lalla.

A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi was told by senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, appearing for Muslim parties including Sunni Waqf Board and one of the original litigants M Siddiq, that Nirmohi Akhara being the 'shebait' (devotee) was only seeking right to manage and offer puja and was not claiming title.

"You do not dispute their (Akhara's) shebaiti rights," the bench asked Dhavan on the 19th day of the hearing in the case.

"No. I do not," Dhavan replied to the bench, also comprising justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer.

"If you accept that Akahara as 'shebiat' then do you also accept that it was in possession of the outer courtyard," the bench asked.

Dhavan said rights of Akahara as a devotee may be "fine", but they did not change its juristic status and moreover, as a 'shebait' it was only seeking right to management and not the title.

Consistent with the submissions (Muslim side), Akahara has been asking for management rights of outer courtyard where at 'Ram Chabutara', Hindus claimed to have been worshipping and it has nothing to do with the inner portion, he said.

The Akahara was allowed to perform puja in the outer courtyard and it did not entitle the Hindu body to claim ownership of inner courtyard.

The bench then referred to pleadings of the lawsuit of Sunni Wakf Board and said it had sought title over entire disputed area.

It said by accepting that Akahara has rights as 'shebait' "then you are necessarily giving up your claim over 'Ram Chabutara' and 'Sita Rasoi' of outer courtyard...Therefore, the outer courtyard cannot be a mosque."
The court then said the right of 'shebait' may be related to management only, but "so far as the deity (Ram Lalla Virajman') is concerned, its right is more than the easementary one."
Dhavan, who is assisted by lawyer Ejaz Maqbool, said, "Quranic law as accepted by Indian law will apply."
The case of Muslims was of 'Wakf' by user and the people can co-exist as it the property of Muslims, he said, adding, "Some people came and say they have been praying here, I do not stop them. It is the title question which I have been answering."