{"id":218090,"date":"2019-08-14T16:45:25","date_gmt":"2019-08-14T11:15:25","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=218090"},"modified":"2019-08-27T17:37:44","modified_gmt":"2019-08-27T12:07:44","slug":"ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/","title":{"rendered":"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Supreme Court:<\/strong> On the 5th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, arguments on\u00a0whether a temple existed at the disputed site in Ayodhya were presented before the 5-judge bench of Ranjan Gogoi, CJ and SA Bobde, Dr. DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer, JJ.<\/p>\n<p>Senior advocate C S Vaidyanathan, appearing for deity Ram Lalla Virajman, advanced arguments on whether there was an existing temple over which the mosque came up, before a five-judge constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi.<\/p>\n<p>Three judges of the Allahabad High Court had held that there was a temple at the disputed site, Vaidyanathan told the bench also comprising Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer.<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>&#8220;Justice SU Khan of the high court had said that the mosque was built on the ruins of the temple,&#8221;<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Senior advocate K Parasaran, also appearing for deity &#8216;Ram Lalla Virajman&#8217; told the court that it must do &#8220;full and complete justice&#8221; in all matters before it.<\/p>\n<p>The bench had on Friday last asked as to whether anyone from the &#8216;Raghuvansha&#8217; (descendants of Lord Ram) dynasty still resides in Ayodhya.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">A five-judge constitution bench is conducting a day-to-day hearing in the Ayodhya title dispute case, after it had on\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/08\/02\/ayodhya-dispute-sc-to-hold-day-to-day-hearing-from-aug-6-after-mediation-committee-fails\/\">August 2 observed that since the mediation panel on Ayodhya matter has failed to achieve any final settlement in the matter, it will hold a day-to-day hearing in the case from August 6<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Fourteen appeals are pending before the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court verdict which ordered equal division of the 2.77-acre disputed land in Ayodhya among the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">The 16th-century Babri Masjid was demolished on December 6, 1992.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><em>(Source: PTI)<\/em><\/p>\n<hr \/>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>More from the day-to-day hearing:<\/strong><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/08\/06\/ayodhya-hearing-day-1-no-muslim-has-entered-the-disputed-land-since-1934-nirmohi-akhara\/\"><strong>No Muslim has entered the disputed land since 1934: Nirmohi Akhara<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/08\/07\/ayodhya-hearing-day-2-sc-seeks-evidence-of-possession-of-ramjanmabhumi-from-nirmohi-akhara\/\"><strong>SC seeks evidence of possession of Ramjanmabhumi from Nirmohi Akhara<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/08\/08\/ayodhya-hearing-day-3both-hindus-muslims-have-always-called-the-disputed-site-a-janmasthana-ram-lallas-counsel\/\"><strong>Both Hindus &amp; Muslims have always called the disputed site a \u2018Janmasthana\u2019: Ram Lalla\u2019s counsel<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/08\/09\/ayodhya-hearing-day-4-sr-adv-rajeev-dhavan-calls-the-decision-to-hear-the-case-5-days-in-a-week-is-inhuman\/\"><strong>SC rejects Sr Adv Rajeev Dhavan\u2019s plea against 5-days a week hearing<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><strong>Also read:<\/strong><\/b><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/03\/08\/ayodhya-dispute-to-be-settled-by-a-confidential-court-monitored-mediation-proceedings\/\"><b><strong>Ayodhya Dispute to be settled by a \u2018confidential\u2019 Court monitored mediation; No Gag order passed [Full Report]<\/strong><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2019\/02\/26\/breaking-should-ayodhya-dispute-be-decided-by-mediation-sc-to-decide-on-march\/\"><b><strong>Should Ayodhya dispute be decided by mediation? SC to decide on March 6 [Full Report]<\/strong><\/b><\/a><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><b><strong><a href=\"https:\/\/blog.scconline.com\/post\/2018\/09\/27\/ayodhya-matter-not-to-be-referred-to-larger-bench-matter-not-barred-by-res-judicata-in-ismail-faruqui-case-either-sc\/\">Ram Mandir Babri Masjid| Ayodhya matter not to be referred to larger bench; matter not barred by res judicata in Ismail Faruqui case either: SC<\/a><\/strong><\/b><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court: On the 5th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, arguments on\u00a0whether a temple existed at the disputed site in <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":121,"featured_media":154914,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1188,2],"tags":[16201,3033,31110,3740,34850,20801,31077],"class_list":["post-218090","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hot_off_the_press","category-news","tag-ayodhya","tag-Babri_Masjid","tag-live-streaming","tag-mediation","tag-nirmohi-akhara","tag-ram-janmabhoomi","tag-ram-mandir-babri-masjid"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v27.4 (Yoast SEO v27.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court: On the 5th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, arguments on\u00a0whether a temple existed at the disputed site in\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-08-14T11:15:25+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-08-27T12:07:44+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Prachi Bhardwaj\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"headline\":\"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-08-14T11:15:25+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-08-27T12:07:44+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":413,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/09\\\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Ayodhya\",\"Babri Masjid\",\"live streaming\",\"mediation\",\"Nirmohi Akhara\",\"Ram Janmabhoomi\",\"Ram Mandir Babri Masjid\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Hot Off The Press\",\"News\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/\",\"name\":\"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/09\\\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-08-14T11:15:25+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-08-27T12:07:44+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/09\\\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2017\\\/09\\\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/2019\\\/08\\\/14\\\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942\",\"name\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/6665f184a76dd0a4639fad050ee78a671e5bd5b4767e2cd8b57665c9461c34ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/6665f184a76dd0a4639fad050ee78a671e5bd5b4767e2cd8b57665c9461c34ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/6665f184a76dd0a4639fad050ee78a671e5bd5b4767e2cd8b57665c9461c34ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Prachi Bhardwaj\"},\"description\":\"Senior Associate Editor\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.scconline.com\\\/blog\\\/post\\\/author\\\/editor_3\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site","og_description":"Supreme Court: On the 5th Day of the Ayodhya Title dispute hearing, arguments on\u00a0whether a temple existed at the disputed site in","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-08-14T11:15:25+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-08-27T12:07:44+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Prachi Bhardwaj","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/"},"author":{"name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"headline":"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site","datePublished":"2019-08-14T11:15:25+00:00","dateModified":"2019-08-27T12:07:44+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/"},"wordCount":413,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","keywords":["Ayodhya","Babri Masjid","live streaming","mediation","Nirmohi Akhara","Ram Janmabhoomi","Ram Mandir Babri Masjid"],"articleSection":["Hot Off The Press","News"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/","name":"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","datePublished":"2019-08-14T11:15:25+00:00","dateModified":"2019-08-27T12:07:44+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/08\/14\/ayodhya-hearing-day-5-arguments-advanced-on-whether-there-was-an-existing-temple-at-the-disputed-site\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Ayodhya hearing| Arguments advanced on whether there was an existing temple at the disputed site"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/de579aff4bc6dd24b68d6d472ac92942","name":"Prachi Bhardwaj","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6665f184a76dd0a4639fad050ee78a671e5bd5b4767e2cd8b57665c9461c34ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6665f184a76dd0a4639fad050ee78a671e5bd5b4767e2cd8b57665c9461c34ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/6665f184a76dd0a4639fad050ee78a671e5bd5b4767e2cd8b57665c9461c34ed?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Prachi Bhardwaj"},"description":"Senior Associate Editor","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_3\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218090","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/121"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=218090"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/218090\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/154914"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=218090"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=218090"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=218090"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}