 Print
Indian Supreme Court decision on Babri Mosque demolition goes to Ram Temple.
11-10-2019
Saturday November 9th, A five-judge pane of the Indian Supreme Court Bench delivered their unanimous decision cleared the way for constructing a Ram Temple in Ayodhya. The decision also directed the Centre to allot a 5-acre plot to the Sunni Waqf Board for building a mosque.
The decision is hoped to bring an end to a 150 years old claim by the Hindus that the Mosque was built on a old site of Ram Temple. Hindus believe that Ram was born at the site and the court said he was symbolically the owner of the land. The judgment running into 1,045 pages also said it was also clear that the destruction of the 16th-century three-dome structure by Hindu kar sevaks, who wanted to build a Ram temple there, was a wrong that “must be remedied”.
Retired Supreme Court judge Ashok Kumar Ganguly was disturbed by the judgment and raised questions about the Supreme Court’s verdict.
“I am a little disturbed by the judgment. When the Constitution came we saw a mosque and in the previous judgment of the Supreme Court relating to the demolition it has been recorded that there was a 500-year-old shrine which has been demolished,” Ganguly said.
“When the Constitution came, the law became different. We recognised the fundamental right to freedom of religion; practice, preach and profess religion. If I have that fundamental right I also have the right to protect the shrines. The day the structure was demolished that right was also demolished,” he said.
Ganguly, who is an author of the the book Landmark Judgements that Changed India, asked what evidence did the judges based their judgement to say that the land belonged to Ram Lalla.
“You have said that there was a structure under the mosque but you have not said that the structure was that of a temple. There is no evidence that after the demolition of a temple, a mosque has been built. On the basis of what archaeological insight can court decide that after 500 years?” said Ganguly, who is also a former chairperson of the West Bengal Human Rights Commission.
The Supreme Court, he pointed out, has accepted that if namaz is offered in a place then it has to be considered a mosque.
“So considering it a mosque, which has been standing there for 500 years, how do you decide the title after 500 years? On what basis can you do it? Those who have come here (in court) to depose have documents. On the basis of archaeological report you cannot decide titles,” said Ganguly.
“And today what will people think? That in 1992 this mosque was demolished, now it is 2019, and in 2022 they challenge the Supreme Court? What happens to constitutional morality? That is something I felt a little disturbed about,” said Ganguly who retired in 2012.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind issued a statement appealing to the Muslims and fellow-brothers to maintain the peace and harmony in the country and should not take it as win or loss. President Maulana Madani also said that this decision is not in line with our expectations but the Supreme Court is supreme.
He also added the Muslims should not be disappointed, they must trust in Allah and keep praying and turn towards ALLAH. He asked all the Indian Muslim to must perform the Salah in the Masjid as it is a right of every Masjid.
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind have legally fought for justice till end. JAMIAT Ulama-i- Hind had appointed prominent lawyers of the country, evidence had been collected and translated ancient documents were presented in the courts. He said, ``we were hopeful that the decision would be in our favor but it could not realized.``
Footnotes:
|