Babri Demolition Case: Allahabad High Court Reserves Judgment On Maintainability Of Appeal Against Acquittal Order

The bench of Justice Ramesh Sinha and Justice Saroj Yadav reserved the judgment after the parties concluded their arguments today.

Essentially, the plea has been filed challenging the Judgment of Special CBI Judge S K Yadav (delivered on September 30, 2020) holding held that the demolition of the mosque was not premeditated and that there was no criminal conspiracy behind it.

The verdict, originally in the Hindi language went on to acquit persons including prominent BJP leaders L K Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharati, Kalyan Singh etc.

Read more about the Judgment here: Babri Demolition Case : Anti-Socials Climbed On The Dome; They Can't Be Called Ram-Bhakts, Says Court

The instant plea has been filed by two Ayodhya residents - Haji Mahmood Ahmad and Syed Akhlaq Ahmad who claimed to have witnessed the demolition of the disputed structure on December 6, 1992. They have also claimed in the plea that they are the victims of the incident.

Our readers may note that the plea was originally filed in 2021 as a criminal revision plea, however, on July 18, 2022, when it came for hearing before a single judge, the Senior Counsel Syed Farman Ali Naqvi (for the revisionist/appellant) submitted before the Court that due to an inadvertent mistake, the plea had been moved as a revision plea and they ought to have preferred a criminal appeal.

It was his further submission that in the exercise of the powers under section 401(5) Cr.P.C., this court may treat the revision plea as the appeal of the revisionists. Considering this submission and after hearing Shiv P.Shukla, the counsel for the C.B.I., and Vimal Kumar Srivastava, counsel for the respondent-State, the Court had directed that the revision plea be treated as an appeal under section 372 Cr.P.C.

The arguments put forth by the alleged Victims

Appellant number 2 (Syed Akhlaq Ahmad) specifically argued that he is not only the witness of the said incident but also a victim as his house and household goods were burnt during the incident.

"the appellants have not only suffered loss of their historical place of worship known as Babri Masjid but have also suffered great financial loss on account of the destruction of their houses which were not only damaged and looted by the offender and their collaborators but their houses were also put on fire and most of the belonging of their houses had also been destroyed on account of the arson and loot of their houses," the rejoinder submitted by them reads.

It was also argued by the victims that CBI had investigated the case as it is a premier investigating agency of the criminal case, however, after the acquittal of the accused persons in the case, it was opposing the instant appeal as if the agency is representing the accused.

"The agency has adorned the role of defence on behalf of accused persons and the victims were left to accomplish the job of prosecution despite being victims having no means and help from any one neither the State nor the Police nor the CBI," the alleged victims have submitted.

Case title - Haji Mahboob Ahmad And Anr. v. State Of U.P. Thru. Home Secy. Lucknow And Ors

Click Here To Read/Download Order