Amlendu Bhushan Khan
NEW DELHI : Supreme Court on Saturday gave the historical judgement on Ayodhya case and awarded a bitterly disputed religious site to Hindus, dealing a defeat to Muslims who also claim the land that has sparked some of the bloodiest riots in the history of independent India.The judgment paved the way for the construction of a Ram Temple by a Trust at the disputed site at Ayodhya, and directed the Centre to allot an alternative 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a new mosque at a “prominent” place in the holy town in Uttar Pradesh.
Representatives of the Muslim group involved in the case criticised the judgment as unfair and said it was likely to seek a review of the verdict.
In 1992 a Hindu mob destroyed the 16th-century Babri Mosque on the site, triggering riots in which about 2,000 people, most of them Muslims, were killed across the country. Court battles over the ownership of the site followed.
In a bid to put an end to the more than a century old dispute that has torn the social fabric of the nation, the court in a unanimous 5-0 verdict ruled that the 2.77 acres of disputed land where the demolished Babri Masjid once stood will remain with a Central government receiver and be handed over to a Trust within three months for the construction of the temple.
“The faith of the Hindus that Lord Ram was born at the demolished structure is undisputed,” ruled a 5-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi weeks after a marathon 40-day hearing– the second longest in the history of apex court. Justice Gogoi is due to retire on November 17.
The verdict in the politically-sensitive Ram Janmbhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, one of the most important and most anticipated judgements in India’s history, runs into 1,045-page pages.
The disputed site in Ayodhya was occupied by the 16th century Babri mosque which was destroyed by Hindu kar sevaks on December 6, 1992. The demolition had triggered communal riots.
The apex court bench, also comprising Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer, said possession of the disputed 2.77 acre land rights will be handed over to the deity ‘Ram Lalla’, who is one of the three litigants in the case
It said the new mosque should be constructed at a “prominent site” and a trust should be formed within three months for the construction of the temple at the site many Hindus believe Lord Ram was born.
As security remained tightened at communally sensitive places across the country, Prime Minister Narendra Modi led a host of leaders who appealed for peace, unity and amity. He said the verdict should not be seen as anybody’s win or loss
RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat said the verdict should not be seen as anybody’s victory or defeat. The building of a Ram temple is a long-held objective of the BJP
The verdict was pronounced on 14 appeals filed in the apex court against the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment, delivered in four civil suits, that the 2.77-acre land in Ayodhya be partitioned equally among the three parties — the Sunni Waqf Board, the Nirmohi Akhara and ‘Ram Lalla’
Jubilant Hindus, who have long campaigned for a temple to be built on the ruins of the mosque, set off fire crackers in celebration in Ayodhya after the court decision was announced. Thousands of paramilitary force members and police were deployed in Ayodhya and other sensitive areas across India. There were no immediate reports of unrest.
“This verdict shouldn’t be seen as a win or loss for anybody,” Modi said on Twitter.
“May peace and harmony prevail!”
Still, the verdict is likely to be viewed as win for Modi’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and its backers.
It comes months after Modi’s government stripped the Muslim-majority Jammu and Kashmir region of its special status as a state, delivering on yet another election promise to its largely Hindu support base.
Neelanjan Sircar, an assistant professor at Ashoka University near New Delhi, said the court ruling would benefit the BJP, which won re-election in May, but a slowing economy would ultimately take centre stage for voters.
“In the short term, there will be a boost for the BJP,” said Sircar. “These things don’t work forever … Ram Temple isn’t going to put food on the table.”
Hindus believe the site is the birthplace of Lord Ram, a physical incarnation of the Hindu god Vishnu, and say the site was holy for Hindus long before the Muslim Mughals, India’s most prominent Islamic rulers, built the Babri mosque there in 1528.
The five-judge bench, headed by the Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, reached a unanimous judgment to hand over the plot of just 2.77 acres (1.1 hectares), or about the size of a soccer field, to the Hindu group.
The court also directed that another plot of 5 acres (2 hectare) in Ayodhya be provided to the Muslim group that contested the case but that was not enough to mollify some.
“The country is now moving towards becoming a Hindu nation,” Asaduddin Owaisi, an influential Muslim opposition politician, told reporters.
Modi’s party hailed the ruling as a “milestone”.
“I welcome the court decision and appeal to all religious groups to accept the decision,” Home Minister Amit Shah, who is also president of the BJP, said on Twitter.
The Sunni Muslim group involved in the case said it would likely file a review petition, which could trigger another protracted legal battle.
“This is not a justice,” said the group’s lawyer, Zafaryab Jilani.
Muslim organisations appealed for calm.
The Hindu group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh – the parent organisation of Modi’s party – had already decided against any celebrations to avoid provoking sectarian violence between India’s majority Hindus and Muslims, who constitute 14% of its 1.3 billion people.
Restrictions were placed on gatherings in some places and internet services were suspended. Elsewhere, police monitored social media to curb rumours.
Streets in Ayodhya were largely deserted and security personnel patrolled the main road to Lucknow, the capital of the northern state of Uttar Pradesh.
Ayodhya residents were glued to their televisions and mobile phones for news of the ruling, which delighted Hindus when it came.
“Everyone should come together to ensure that the construction work begins at the site without any delay,” roadside vendor Jitan Singh said over the chants of “Jai Shri Ram” (hail Lord Ram) from fellow shop-keepers.
The bench said the high court wrongly decided the title suit by resorting to partitioning of the disputed land in three parts
“The disputed site was government land in the revenue records,” the court said adding,” The fact that there lay a temple beneath the destroyed structure has been established by the Archaeological Survey of India(ASI) and the underlying structure was not an Islamic structure.”
“The history and culture of this country have been home to quests for truth, through the material, the political, and the spiritual. This Court is called upon to fulfil its adjudicatory function where it is claimed the two quests for the truth impinge on the freedoms of the other or violate the rule of law,” it added
C S Vaidyanathan, lawyer for deity ‘Ram Lalla’, said the verdict is very balanced and it is a victory of people. But, the Sunni Waqf Board, one of the main parties, said it was not satisfied and will seek a review
“The verdict holds no value for us, It has lot of contradictions,” Zafaryab Jilani, lawyer for the Board, told reporters
The Nirmohi Akhara said it has no “regrets” regarding the verdict
Home Minister Amit Shah appealed to all communities to accept the verdict and maintain peace and remain committed for ‘Ek Bharat Shreshtha Bharat’ while Defence Minister Rajnath Singh urged everyone to take the verdict with equanimity and magnanimity. The Congress said it respects the verdict and is in favour of construction of Ram temple
Former VHP president Praveen Togadia said giving Ram Lalla’s birth land for Ram Temple is a salute to the sacrifice of lakhs of workers
Prominent Muslim leaders appealed for peace and harmony even as they expressed surprise
“I was surprised to see the ruling and it’s beyond my understanding. I feel there were enough evidences in favour of the mosque but these were not taken into consideration,” Mufti Abul Qasim Nomani, the current Mohtamim (Vice-Chancellor) of the Islamic seminary Darul Uloom Deoband, told PTI
Prohibitory orders were issued across the national capital to maintain public order, according to Delhi Police while an emergency Operations Centre was set up in Lucknow to keep an eye on reports from media, social media and other sources on the verdict
As Justice Gogoi read out the operative part of the verdict for 45 minutes, people belonging to both Hindu and Muslim communities in Ayodhya sat glued before Television sets, while the tech-savvy youth kept a tab on their mobiles phones
Directing allotment of alternative land to Muslims to build a new mosque, the court said the Hindus have established their case that they were in possession of outer courtyard and the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board has failed to establish its case
The court said the extensive nature of Hindus worshipping at outer courtyard at the disputed site has been there, and the evidence suggests the Muslims offered Friday prayers at mosque which indicates that they had not lost possession of the site
It said that despite obstruction caused in offering prayers at Mosque, the evidences suggest that there was no abandonment in offering prayers
The court also said that the Hindus consider the disputed site as the birthplace of Lord Ram and even Muslims say this about that place
The bench said the existence of Sita Rasoi, Ram Chabutra and Bhandar grih are the testimony of the religious fact of the place
The court further said however that the title cannot be established on the ground of faith and belief and they are only indicators for deciding the dispute.
