In 2010, the Allahabad high court had asked had partitioned the 2.77-acre land equally among the three disputing parties.
New Delhi: The SC on Friday asked the Muslim parties about the origins of the holiest place in Islam as their counsel contested the stand of Ram Janmabhoomi (birthplace of Ram) being a juristic personality (a legal entity having stakes in the case) in the Ayodhya title dispute.
Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, who headed the constitution bench and Justice SA Bobde, the second senior-most judge on the bench asked senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan if the 'Kaaba is sculpted or Swayambhu (self-manifested), news agency IANS reported.
Dhavan, representing the Muslim parties replied saying that it is intrinsically divine and that Prophet Mohammad had said that there is one god.
The query was put forth as the judges wanted to know the Muslim parties' stand on Ram Janmabhoomi, the birthplace of Ram having stakes in the Ayodya title dispute.
In 2010, the Allahabad high court had partitioned the 2.77-acre land equally among the three disputing parties, the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla Virajman (the birthplace).
Dhavan also contested the Hindu parties' reliance on Skanda Purana, a Hindu religious text to support their arguments on the birthplace of Lord Ram at the disputed site.
He commented on Suit 5, in the Ayodhya dispute filed by Devki Nandan in 1989 as next friend of Ram Lalla who can represent the deity legally.
His main concern -- the court drawing a conclusion on the basis of a represent calling himself as the next friend of the deity.
He also stated that the concept of belief in the birthplace of God being invented in 1989.
Justice Bobde queried Dhawan on his argument about a religious place acting as a juristic personality and the concept coming into the picture in 1989. He stated that there was no assertion on the concept of before that.
Justice Ashok Dhavan said that the concept of a juristic personality is still developing.
While Justice DY Chandrachud said that 2 jurisprudential ideas need to be kept in consideration.
One is the need to protect the environment and the other being a need to protect the interest of the worshippers while emphasizing the need for recognition of the deity.
The court also stated that the sanctity of any belief should be looked from the perception of belief of that religion. "There has to be low threshold inquiry, and belief has to be accepted," it said. The arguments will continue on Monday.