Babri Masjid demolition was just an incident, says SC

Discussion in 'Politics & Society' started by KS, Jan 17, 2012.

  1. KS

    KS Bye bye DFI Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Aug 3, 2010
    Messages:
    8,008
    Likes Received:
    5,718
    Location:
    irrelevant
    NEW DELHI: The Babri Masjid demolition is just an incident and there is nothing famous or infamous about it, the Supreme Court today said while listing CBI's plea for levelling charges of criminal conspiracy against senior BJP leader L K Advani, Shiv Sena Chief Bal Thackeray and 18 others to March 27.

    "What is famous about it. It was an incident which happened and parties are before us. It is not famous or infamous," a bench of Justices H L Dattu and C K Prasad said when the Additional Solicitor General said at the beginning of the proceeding that the matter is related to "famous" Babri Masjid demolition case.

    The proceeding before the bench could not go on as it was mentioned that some of the parties in the case have not filed their response and the case was then adjourned for March.

    The apex court had on March 4 last year issued notice to 21 people including Advani, Thackeray, Kalyan Singh, Uma Bharti, Satish Pradhan, CR Bansal, MM Joshi, Vinay Katiyar, Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore, Sadhvi Ritambhara, VH Dalmia, Mahant Avaidhynath, RV Vedanti, Param Hans Ram Chandra Das, Jagdish Muni Maharaj, BL Sharma, Nritya Gopal Das, Dharam Das, Satish Nagar and Moreshwar Save.

    The court had asked all of them to file their response on why criminal conspiracy charges should not be revived against them in the Babri Masjid demolition case.

    It had passed the order on an appeal filed by CBI challenging the May 21, 2010 Allahabad High Court judgement upholding a special court's decision to drop the charges against the leaders.
     
    balai_c likes this.
  2.  
  3. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    I am glad the SC is exhibiting calm when others are attempting to once again stir up emotions!
     
    Singh likes this.
  4. warriorextreme

    warriorextreme Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,369
    Likes Received:
    536
    Location:
    Mumbai
    ghanta accident..
     
  5. SHURIDH

    SHURIDH Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2011
    Messages:
    1,484
    Likes Received:
    293
    Location:
    Murshidabad,Paschim banga,India.
    It was just a incident! Nothing else.i am shocked
     
  6. nitesh

    nitesh Mob Control Manager Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2009
    Messages:
    7,541
    Likes Received:
    1,260
    Location:
    Bangalore
    Well said judges, yes it was an incident, let's not allow others to get political mileage.
     
  7. sob

    sob Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    May 4, 2009
    Messages:
    6,359
    Likes Received:
    3,661
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Do not just read the headlines. Read the first paragraph and you shall understand.
     
  8. johnee

    johnee Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2009
    Messages:
    3,474
    Likes Received:
    467
    Incident == event==occurrence. The SC deflated the attempt of Additional Solicitor General to add unnecessary adjectives like 'famous'.

    Secondly, SC did not say 'nothing else'. You inferred it and wrongly. They said the case is before them to be decided.

    The title is the best example of sensationalism by making a mountain out of an molehill.
     
    Singh likes this.
  9. The Messiah

    The Messiah Bow Before Me! Elite Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2010
    Messages:
    10,788
    Likes Received:
    4,552
    incident and not accident.

    "What is famous about it. It was an incident which happened and parties are before us. It is not famous or infamous"

    There is nothing wrong about it in technical and literal terms. In essence court is saying it is irrelevent how famous it is and that all are equal in the eyes of law. Think with your head and not your heart.
     
    Singh likes this.
  10. arya

    arya Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    340


    if you have respect to supreme court then you can leave the nation why you are living here while you cant have respect to higher institue
     
  11. arya

    arya Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    340
    why shocked in my town many Hindus temples are demolished

    why all sympathy to Muslim
     
  12. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011

    not to sound callous but post babri 'incident' muslims suffered a great deal more than hindus.
     
  13. arya

    arya Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    340
    well have to you ever visited the site?? have you aware the RAM and his story ??

    just one question if in India we cant make a temple , then what you expect temple in Pakistan or in china ...

    well if Hindus are majority that not means that we will not show any respect to them

    just because of vote bank leaders are talking about Muslim no one is talking about other minority living here

    we all are Indian why not govt per-mote inter religion marriage to break religion system here in India
     
  14. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Unfortunately not.

    yes

    Generally a freedom to build religious institutions doesn't mean you can build them anywhere you feel like. And this matter was sub-judice.

    who is this addressed to ?

    and who is that ?

    inter religion, inter caste etc marriages are not barred.
     
  15. arya

    arya Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    340

    yes not barred but dont you think govt should permote them , dont you want that we all should known by our first name not last name
     
    Param likes this.
  16. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    I wouldn't want the government to promote any kind of marriages, its creepy.
     
  17. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    This is not judgement but sense of SC before starting the proceeding. Case will be heard, arguments will be made & maybe after year or two; some judgement will be in sight.

    Intercaste marriages? This topic is about to be blown out of proportion already :facepalm:
     
  18. arya

    arya Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2009
    Messages:
    2,312
    Likes Received:
    340
    from 1947 not a single effort is done by govt to break caste or religion system even they are trying to wide the gap

    dont you think inter caste and religion marraige will be only solution in india ..
     
  19. Param

    Param Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2010
    Messages:
    2,808
    Likes Received:
    647
    Location:
    TN
    That's a good idea, but any such govt will be kicked out of power and those leaders will never come back to power.

    Let the govt first frame and implement stricter laws against honor killings.
     
  20. Ray

    Ray The Chairman Defence Professionals Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2009
    Messages:
    43,118
    Likes Received:
    23,545
    Location:
    Somewhere
    Much ado over nothing!
     
  21. nrj

    nrj Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2009
    Messages:
    9,252
    Likes Received:
    3,347
    Location:
    Brussels
    It is not aim of Indian Union to break the religion or caste system. The aim is to keep all factions together & flourish them with inclusive growth.

    What I think is irrelevant at this point when divide-and-rule is the historic & the best method to rule crab-syndrome ridden Indian context.

    There could be many solutions, one of which I will recommend is scrapping naming system of individuals/landmarks/public-schemes etc with binary numbering convention.
     
    Last edited: Jan 17, 2012

Share This Page