The first posting was Faizabad, the first promotion as ADJ in Faizabad and the final decision on the demolition of Babri Masjid in the same Faizabad (now Ayodhya district).
In the life of Special Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav, who is hearing this criminal case of 28 years old, it seems that Faizabad has been returning to him regularly.
As a presiding officer of the Lucknow-based special court (Ayodhya case), he is going to hear the trial on September 30.
Five years ago on August 5, he was appointed as a special judge in this case.
On 19 April 2017, the Supreme Court ordered him to complete the trial in two years by conducting a daily trial.
The significance of this case can be gauged from the fact that 32 key accused, including BJP's mentor leaders LK Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi, former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh, former Union Minister Uma Bharti, were sent to Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav's court. Has asked to appear in court that day.
Who is Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav
Born at the home of Ramakrishna Yadav of Pakhanpur village in Jaunpur district of eastern Uttar Pradesh, Surendra Kumar Yadav was selected for state judicial service at the age of 31.
His judicial life began with the first posting of the post of Additional Munsif in Faizabad, reaching the rank of District Judge of the capital Lucknow via Ghazipur, Hardoi, Sultanpur, Etawah, Gorakhpur.
Had he not been given the responsibility of judge of the Special Court (Ayodhya case), he would have retired in September last year.
What do the people of the bar think about their presence on the bench?
Advocate Sanjeev Pandey, general secretary of the Central Bar Association, Lucknow, says, "He is a very soft-tempered person. He never lets any kind of pressure on himself dominate him. He is counted in good and honest judges. . "
Last year, when he was relieved of the post of Lucknow District Judge, the Bar Association farewelled him.
But the Supreme Court had already extended the term of his retirement and asked him to complete the hearing of the Babri Masjid demolition case by continuing as the presiding officer of the Special Court (Ayodhya case).
That is, he retired as a district judge, but remained a special judge.
Advocate Sanjeev Pandey says, "We bid them farewell with the expectation that they will give a historic decision which will be written in the pages of history. They are expected to give their decision without any pressure."
Article 142 of the constitution
The extension of tenure of a judge who is going to retire for the same case was historical in itself as the Supreme Court had exercised the right under Article 142 of the Constitution for this.
Under this article, the Supreme Court has the right to take any necessary decision in any matter pending before it for 'complete justice'.
Although the Supreme Court has used Article 142 several times in the public interest, but experts say that this is perhaps the first time in the Babri Masjid demolition case that the country's largest court has completed hearing the trial judge going to retire. Till being asked to remain in office.
While the Uttar Pradesh government had told the court that there is no provision for increasing the retirement age in the state judicial service.
Not only this, the Supreme Court said much more for 'complete justice' in the Ayodhya case, "There will be no new hearing till the whole process of trial is over. The judge who is hearing will not be transferred. The hearing will not be postponed until the court realizes that it is no longer possible to hear on a particular date. Must enter. "
Scandal numbers 197 and 198
The background of the Babri Masjid demolition case that Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav has to decide, is related to two FIRs filed on 6 December 1992.
Case number 197 has been accused of robbery, looting, injuring against millions of car servants, damaging public worship, and increasing enmity between two communities in the name of religion.
People like LK Advani, Ashok Singhal, Vinay Katiyar, Uma Bharti, Sadhvi Ritambhara, Murali Manohar Joshi, Giriraj Kishore, and Vishnuhari Dalmiya were named in case number 198. He is accused of giving religious disharmony and inflammatory speech.
However, apart from these two FIRs, 47 more cases were also registered separately. A total of 49 people were accused by the CBI in the Babri Masjid demolition case, but 17 people have died during the years-long trial.
Bal Thackeray, Ashok Singhal, Giriraj Kishore, Vishnu Hari Dalmiya are among the 17 accused who are no more in this case.
Challenges encountered during the trial
'The accused are present in person, the witness is absent because he does not live on the address he gave in the statement given before the magistrate.'
'The accused are not personally present, no witnesses are also present.'
'The witness was summoned for testimony but today he could not appear in the court. He told the court that he will be present tomorrow.
'The witness has to prove it by watching the VHS videocassette. The CBI does not have the equipment in the court to show the cassette. The CBI says that only the technical staff of Doordarshan's Delhi center can come and run this cassette.
'It has been informed through an email by Sakshi that he is in Delhi and is 69 years old and unable to travel.'
These are some of the notices that were recorded on the record in the court of Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav during the trial. Apart from this, he also had to settle dozens of appeals for appeals.
How challenging is this for a trial judge?
Retired judge SC Pathak says, "Those who do not want to testify, they keep on deferring. Such circumstances keep coming up during a trial but the court has the powers to summon the witness. If the witness If it does not come, then it can be tightened, a warrant can be issued against it. It can be arrested and presented before the court. The court has such powers. "
30th of September
The Supreme Court has already decided a historic case related to the mosque which was demolished on December 6, 1992, during the reign of Mughal emperor Babur.
In November last year, a five-judge constitution bench headed by Justice Gogoi, while giving the right to build a Ram temple to the Hindu side in Ayodhya, said that 70 years ago, the worship of Muslims in the 450-year-old Babri Mosque was wrongly prevented. And 27 years ago Babri Masjid was demolished illegally.
The second case is waiting in the court of Special Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav on September 30 for the verdict.
Is it not a pressurized responsibility in itself to decide against the guilty people of a mosque that is illegally dropped?
Retired judge SC Pathak says, "A judge does not mind what people will say. He does not even care whether his decision will be praised or criticized. The main thing is that a judge As to how the evidence has been laid before you and the credibility of those evidences, a judge has to decide on these things. "
On September 1, the court of Judge Surendra Kumar Yadav had completed the hearing in this case and started writing the decision from September 2.
The CBI produced 351 witnesses and around 600 documents in its favor in this case.
Amidst the war with Russia, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has announced that he will soo
Hemkunt Foundation set up a 500-bed temporary covid care center
Gurugram Covid patients are not getting beds in private and government hospitals. Family members
Corona cases are not taking the name of decreasing in India. In the last 24 hours, 12,430 new cas
The number of foreign terrorists operating in Jammu and Kashmir has increased. This was revealed
Salman Khan secretly married Sonakshi Sinha? Know what is the truth of this photo
Wedding pictures of Bollywood superstar Salman Khan and Sonakshi Sinha are becoming fiercely vira
The third wave of corona across the country is now on the verge of ending. Like every day, even t
Salman Khan has never accepted his relationship with Yulia Vantur, but the two often make headlin
IND-W vs SL-W 1st T20: Indian women's team won Dambulla T20, beat Sri Lanka by 34 runs
India Women Tour of Sri Lanka: The Indian women's cricket team has won the T20 match in Dambulla.
After the humiliating nine-wicket defeat against Australia in the Indore Test, Indian captain Roh
The Supreme Court today (August 2) gave a detailed verdict on the NEET UG case. The court said th
