Supreme Court Ayodhya verdict: Key questions answered

New Delhi : The Supreme Court of India on Saturday gave a historic verdict on the Ayodhya land dispute case, ruling in favour of the Hindus allowing the construction of Ram temple on the disputed site. The unanimous judgment ordered a 5.1 acres land on an alternate location for the construction of the mosque. "This Court is tasked with the resolution of a dispute whose origins are as old as the idea of India itself. The disputed site has been a flash point of continued conflagration over decades," said the five-judge Constitution Bench that heard the case for 40 days before delivering its much-anticipated verdict.

Here are some key questions related to the case and the verdict

Why the disputed land is being handed over for temple?

"..the evidence...in respect of the possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence adduced by the Muslims."

Why Muslims were awarded alternative site?

"... the Muslims were dispossessed upon the desecration of the mosque on 22/23 December 1949 which was ultimately destroyed on 6 December 1992. There was no abandonment of the mosque by the Muslims. Justice would not prevail if the Court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims who have been deprived of the structure of the mosque through means which should not have been employed in a secular nation committed to the rule of law."

Why dividing the land not feasible and won't ensure lasting peace?

Three-way bifurcation by the High Court was legally unsustainable. The apex court mentioned that division of the land may not have served in the interest of the either parties.

The Babri mosque demolition was a violation of law?

The entire structure of the mosque was brought down in a calculated act of destroying a place of public worship. The Muslims have been wrongly deprived of a mosque which had been constructed well over 450 years ago.