#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 hear the West Bengal SIR case today. With phase 1 of the polling over, the court is likely to witness mentions concerning non inclusion of voters, incidents of violence, and the functioning of appellate tribunals
#SupremeCourt @MamataOfficial #WestBengalLegislativeAssemblyelection2026 #SIR @abhishekaitc @ECISVEEP @BJP4Bengal
NIA submits it's first report in the suo motu case concerning attack on west bengal SIR judicial officers
ASG SAV Raju: Give us time for chargesheet. They are neck deep in investigation
CJI: we are granting.
Sr Adv Kalyan Banerjee: Only 136 appeals have been disposed off out of 27 lakhs filed. This is very very sad.
#Breaking
Delhi court orders FIR against Abhijit Iyer-Mitra for objectionable posts about Newslaundry’ Manisha Pande and other journalists.
@Iyervval @MnshaP @newslaundry
The court says that Iyer-Mitta made sexually coloured remarks against Pande and other journalists and the same are prima facie intended to insult Pande and she has been named in the tweet as well.
“Therefore, on perusal of
the application and the material placed on record by the
complainant, this Court is of the view that the content of the
tweets posted by the accused on “X” platform discloses
commission of cognizable offences under section 75(3) and 79 of
BNS,” the court says.
“This Court is of the view that police investigation is necessary as the offence has been committed in cyber space on platform "X". Therefore, police investigation is necessary to verify the user account on platform "X" from which the said tweets were published. Further police investigation is also necessary to trace and recover the computer source/electronic device from which the said tweets were published. This Court is also of the view that the Action Taken Report which was filed by PSI Ombir in the present case is not satisfactory as the above stated tweets were not considered in the report,” the court adds.
Delhi High Court seeks response of YouTuber Shamita Yadav on the contempt petition filed by Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and Senior Advocate Gaurav Bhatia over defamatory content on social media concerning his appearance on a TV news show.
Bhatia appeared in person to argue his case - it is imperative to note that attacking the dignity of person using obscene and sexually suggestive language under free speech cannot be permissible under any circumstances.
Bhatia - She is repeatedly using the terms “nanga” and “bhajpille”. She is aware that there is a case filed agasint her also. She starts by saying, defamation case on me? She uses obnoxious words, she being a lady. She is an officer of the court as well. She also has to maintain dignity.
Delhi HC to hear today a plea seeking contempt of court action against Arvind Kejriwal, AAP leaders and journalist Ravish Kumar for allegedly publishing the video recording of court proceedings when Kejriwal argued before Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma.
CJ Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and J Tejas Karia to hear the case.
@AamAadmiParty @ArvindKejriwal @Vaiibbhav
The petition has been filed as a PIL by advocate Vaibhav Singh.
Apart from Kejriwal and Kumar, action has been sought against Digvijay Singh, Manish Sisodia, Sanjay Singh Sanjeev Jha, Purandeep Sawhney, Jarnail Singh, Mukesh Ahlawat and Vinay Mishra.
The plea also seek removal of those videos from social media platforms.
All Advocate Generals of all states in Supreme Court , Court 1 today
CJI Surya Kant: You are all here. There are questions of liberty, right to life etc. State writes to HC Chief justice that court needed for sc st act. Then another letter asking for Nia Court. Same special court becomes the nia court. Then family cases. So the special court becomes a mockery.
ASG Aishwarya Bhati: State has to provide land and building. 1 crore recurring fund also needed for each of these court.
CJI: Day to day trial has to take place in these courts.
CJI: This court has to be in adjoining, next building or closest to the place where bar members are. Ideally it should be in the same complex. It has to be one court. Immediately one court needed. Then additional manpower will be needed. So we need trained and experienced judicial officers and there will be temporary increase in higher judicial services cadre strength also.
Jharkhand: There are 790 UAPA cases pending. All principal district judges are dealing with UAPA Cases
CJi: this is what is creating the problem. Hardly they will be on bail
Justice Bagchi: just see how many are undertrials at the moment. That is our concern. Not the state or centre.
CJI: the 24 courts you have are not special courts also.
Justice Bagchi: do you know the burden of the principal district judge. Is the judge dealing with only UAPA