Archive · 8 Sep 2025
Retired Justice Criticizes Ayodhya Verdict and Judicial Approach
A retired judge, Mr. Muralidhar, is speaking out about how the courts handled a very important case about a religious building in India.
He feels the courts made some mistakes, especially after the building was destroyed.
He is concerned because the court seemed to ignore a petition about this destruction for many years.
He also said the final decision didn't seem logical and that the court should not have made it in the first place.
The judge also thinks the media should talk more about all the different cultures and religions in India.
He feels that the courts should not focus on personal religious beliefs among judges to be more fair to everyone.
Retired Justice S Muralidhar criticized the judiciary's handling of the Ayodhya case.
He flagged the non-hearing of the suo motu contempt petition against Kalyan Singh.
Muralidhar questioned the legal basis and logic behind the Ayodhya judgment.
He emphasized India's strength lies in its plurality and diversity.
The retired judge agreed with Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia’s opinion in the Hijab case.
- Who
- Retired Justice S Muralidhar
- What
- Criticized the judiciary's handling of the Ayodhya case aftermath and the basis of the judgment.
- When
- During a speech on Saturday.
- Where
- India Islamic and Cultural Centre.
- Why
- To highlight perceived shortcomings in judicial processes and their impact on Indian society.
Criticism of Judicial Handling
Judicial Defense
Ayodhya Judgment Basis
Criticism of Judicial Handling
No legal basis or prayer, therefore no opposition for the construction of the temple
Judicial Defense
The article doesn't contain right view regarding this issue.
- Subject
- Ayodhya case aftermath and judicial handling
- Speaker
- Retired Justice S Muralidhar
- Event
- AG Noorani memorial lecture
- Key Criticism
- Judiciary's handling of sensitive religious cases
- Notable Mention
- Non-hearing of contempt petition against Kalyan Singh