#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: CS Vaidyanathan citing precedents on adverse possession and ownership.
"There has never been any adverse possession in this case. Hindus have always expressed their desire to worship at this place", Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Discussion now happening on how question of adverse possession will arise only if the property is alienable.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: The property itself being birthplace of Ram and a deity, it is res extra commercium. Thus, there is no question of anyone putting up a mosque there and claiming adverse possession, CS Vaidyanathan argues.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: There cannot be a destruction of an idol or temple. Even if there is no temple, the place itself has sanctity which will always remain, CS Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: The property is res extra commercium and cannot be transferred, sold, alienated or dealt with in any manner, argues Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: In Hindu law unlike in Mohammaden law, a person in the capacity of trustee or Shabait cannot alienate the property, submits Vaidyanathan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Discussion happening now on whether property can be alienated and when the same can be done.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Their suits having been dismissed as time barred, how can they grant relief to them in my suit when most of the findings are in my favour, Vaidyanathan asks.
"I am. I am defendant no. 20 in suit 4", replies PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: I will argue that based on our doctrine, tenets and beliefs, it is a temple. I will start with Atharva Veda, submits PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: It is our case that Babur never built a mosque there and Hindus have been worshipping at that place all along, submits PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: PN Mishra relying on Skanda Purana, Valmiki Ramayana to argue on exact location of Ram Janmasthan.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Hindu texts as the basis for faith is not disputed; what we really need are objective parameters, documentary evidence for temple, Bench tells PN Mishra.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Bench is more interested in objective evidence than references to scriptures.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Justice Chandrachud asks what is the relevance of who built the mosque - be it Babur or somebody else?
Was there a mosque? Thats what is relevant, Justice Chandrachud to PN Mishra.
Once territory of Awadh was annexed to British empire, all structures raised on the soil also got annexed to Britain, Sinha says.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Bench objects, says territory annexed means sovereignty is lost; Does not mean all structures in the territory is vested with the empire.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Sinha says he did not think his turn to argue would come today.
"I thought I would be asked to argue at the very end", says Sinha.
"Is anybody in suit no. 5 ready to argue", asks CJI Ranjan Gogoi.
#RamMandir - #BabriMasjid: Now Senior Advocate Ranjit Kumar making arguments for plaintiff Gopal Singh who died in 1986 and his son has been substituted.
He is plaintiff in suit no. 1, defendant no. 1 in suit no. 4 and defendant no. 1 in suit 5.
Supreme Court to resume hearing pleas by Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam, and other accused seeking bail in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case.
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria
#SupremeCourt #UmarKhalid
Hearing begins
ASG SV Raju for Delhi Police: 53 people killed, more than 530 injured, there was a lot of violence. Petrol bombs were used, stones were pelted, sticks, acid like chemicals were used. Stones were pelted on a small contingent of policemen.
Supreme Court to continue hearing bail pleas by Umar Khalid and other accused in the 2020 Delhi riots conspiracy case.
Delhi police to resume arguments today.
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and NV Anjaria
#SupremeCourt #UmarKhalid
-hearing begins-
ASG SV Raju: I had finished my submissions on parity. I was on the aspect of delay. There was delay even after the high court judgement.
Raju points to the counter affidavit filed by the Delhi police.
He says delay in trial proceedings are attributable to the accused. Highlights orders dated 7.8.25, 12.8.25, 3.9.25, 14.10.25 of the trial court saying adjournments were sought by the accused.
Raju: the trial court may be directed to expedite to proceedings. It’s not a ground to grant bail.
Justice Kumar: on what proposition are you relying on the Salim Khan judgement?
Raju: on delay. In para 13 it has been held that even if someone is in jail for 5 and a half years it’s not a ground to grant bail.
Justice Kumar: but in that case there was direct evidence
Raju: I also have evidence. I shall show to the Court. There’s so much of evidence.
Supreme Court resumes hearing plea seeking investigation into alleged financial irregularities and fund diversion by Indiabulls Housing Finance Ltd (IHFL), now renamed Sammaan Capital Ltd.
Bench: Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and NK Singh
ASG SV Raju: your lordships had sought for the reports last time, I am ready with the reports.
Adv Prashant Bhushan: on the basis of SEBI affidavit this case is crying for an FIR. India bulls is a NBFC. They sent it to the NHB and MCA. Though MCA filed two affidavits before the high court, they don’t mention this before the high court. All that they say is yes certain violations have been noted and they have been compounded. Sameer Gehlot has fled the country. He has bought 5 star hotels, yachts, aircrafts there. SEBI has pointed out that there appears to be evergreening of loans. Shareholding of public is getting transferred to Sameer Gehlot. It needs a detailed investigation.
Justice Kant: very surprisingly CBI has a very cool kind of attitude in this case. We have never seen such a friendly approach by the CBI. This is ultimately public money. There is strong element of public interest. Even if 10% allegations are correct still there are large scale transactions which can be dubbed as dubious. You register an FIR. It will strengthen the hands of the ED, SFIO etc. whoever has to investigate. Why is the MCA indulging in closing the investigation like this? What is their interest in this?
Supreme Court hears case pertaining to long pending bar council elections in States.
Bench: Justices Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan, and NK Singh
On the last hearing, the court had said it will appoint retired high court judges for each state to oversee bar council polls.
Sr. Adv. Gopal Sankarnarayanan: over the last several years we have seen how the bar council of India has followed a particular pattern….
Sr. Adv. Manan Mishra, BCI Chairman: you are in the habit of making such allegations in all the courts against the BCI. You are making a mockery of the bar council.
Supreme Court resumes hearing case regarding appointment of information commissioners.
Bench: Justices Surya Kant and Joymalya Bagchi
ASG KM Nataraj: the meeting unfortunately could not be held.
Prashant Bhushan: today there are 2/11 information commissioners. There are 9 vacancies. It’s been 2 years since this is happening. RTI is not at all a priority for this government.
Court: the committee might have been busy in elections. It is a possibility.
Bhushan: this is not the last instance. This has been going on repeatedly. So many orders. It is defeating a fundamental right declared by this Court. There are more than 25000 cases pending there. Now people have stopped going there. Hardly any progress in any states. Karnataka has appointed all. Otherwise Jharkhand is defunct. Himachal is defunct.
Attorney General for India R Venkataramani to shortly make submissions before Supreme Court on the case challenging the validity of the Tribunal Reforms law #SupremeCourt
AG addresses individual applications first. CESTAT, ITAT etc
AG: there has been detailed deliberations within the government. We have also submitted a note.