Its outside the purview of judiciary to examine the authenticity of the structure.
Plaintiffs in suit 4 couldn't prove their case against my pre existing right to worship: Ranjith Kumar
Sushil Jain, nirmohi Akhara's lawyer objects. CJI allows him to argue. "He's been waiting..he can have 5 mins", CJI
Baba Abhiram is the Pujari and is the Shebait. It is admitted position that idols were placed by Baba Abhiram Das. He is the only person who has direct evidence of shebsitship.
(Dharam Das is Abhiram Das's disciple)
Looking to submit a book called Ayodhya Revisited by Kunal Kishore.
Dhavan objects and urges bench not to take it on record. Says it has been recently written and cannot be treated as evidence
"We could just get up & walk out", exclaims CJI
The original place is the Janmasthan. Inspite of conversion to a mosque, Hindus continued to worship uninterruptedly. There are specific marks where people worship. We do puja to a deity 15 to 20 m away.
CJI allows PN Mishra to argue
Mishra- books on Mohammedan law clearly state that Quran is the primary source of Islamic law
J DYC asks him to argue specifically on limitation
J Nazeer asks whether Sunni waqf board is competent to maintain suit
Dhavan arguing on authenticity of certain translations. Says one of them was not a legitimate translation but a version by Faizabad court judge
The declaration is for a public Waqf. It was a public mosque. It includes mosque, land and many things.
If Hindus are able to prove title before 1855, i adversely own the place for more than 2 centuries: Dhavan #Ayodhya
Mosque was dedicated to almighty and grave yard was also used.
Muslims were peacefully praying when mischievous crowd desecrated the mosque.
Lordships are reading the map incorrectly : Dhavan