Ayodhya verdict explained in one minute - BBC News

India's Supreme Court has ruled that the disputed holy site in Ayodhya in northern India should be given to Hindus who want to build a temple there.

The case, which has been bitterly contested for decades by Hindus and Muslims, centres on the ownership of the land in Uttar Pradesh state.

At the centre of the row is the 16th Century Babri mosque which was demolished by Hindu mobs in 1992, sparking riots that killed nearly 2,000 people.

Muslims would get another plot of land to construct a mosque, the court said.

The BBC's Vikas Pandey explains what happened at the court today and what the reaction has been.

Video produced by Anshul Verma.

[ykd]

You missed one main thing. There was ram mandir there for thousands of years. And morque is build on it.

[satyajeetgupta]

Next update on BREXIT in "JUST A MINUTE "..

[gvamshikrishna]

Very conveniently ignored the fact that the existing Ram temple in 16th century is been demolished by the barbaric Mughal emperor. And only highlighted the demolition of the Mosque in 1992.

[Ujens]

In 1528 A.D. Babur came to Ayodhya and halted here for a week. He destroyed the ancient temple and on its site built a mosque, still known as Babur's mosque.

[ShreyasPreyas]

BBC : Boring Broad Casting, That's BBC in 1 sec

[ignashiplays]

There are many parties on Muslim sides who also supported the judgement but BBC cleverly shown the viewpoint of unsatisfied Muslims. But peace was there. Peace is what made India win 💪

[deekshav]

He left out the archeological findings because that won’t please the Islamic BBC.

[auro]

bbc thinking maybe a church would have made history more interesting?

[anupammudgal]

Hindus are happy, Muslims are happy with the verdict.
India won🇮🇳
But still some outsiders are sad.

[zx]

Subjecting a mythological belief system to rational analysis based on facts and evidence is a pointless exercise.

[debabratasahoo]

Indian people happy over supreme court on Ayodhya dispute site

[f-raptor]

As a Hindu dalit (lower cast) I accept this decision and I also accept that Brahmans (upper cast) are my masters.

[jankrapowski]

Can anyone tell me why this is important to Europeans?
This belongs to BBC India.

[oetpan]

it is rectificationof historical blunder in 1528 by babar, a nonindian.go through the british records please.india has been around long before islam.

[Gouravmhjn]

This issue resulted in about 2000 deaths since 1992 . This explains what religion has done to this world.

[zeeeeeeeeeeshan]

As an Indian Muslim, I always face these questions from Hindus that why don't Muslims simply give up their claims for the holy land? What difference would it make if they lose a Mosque when they have several Mosques across the country?

My answer to them: The fight was never for a piece of land. It was fight for justice. The demolition was illegal and Supreme Court failed to bring the culprits to Justice.

The aftermath of demolition saw bloody communal riots which mainly targeted Muslim households and their petty businesses. It took the Country several years behind.

[manidwivedi]

500 years old issue, in 1 min.
Not possible.

[adventurous]

Imagine what would've happened if the verdict was in muslims favor..

[ziko]

Actually Muslims stopped giving namaz back in 1949 after Ram idols were placed there by Hindus.

Also the muslim litigants aren't filing a Review Petition.

[ashuac]

U couldn't explain what archeology survey of India submit report in court and evidence