Ayodhya Judgement

During last weekend the main development which happened in the country was the delivery of Supreme (SC) verdict on Ram Janam Bhoomi,  Ayodhya case. Full nation was waiting with bated breath about this verdict by SC, and when the verdict was delivered by 5 Judge Bench of SC headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, there was sigh of relief.

In 2010 Allahabad High Court (HC) in the same case had given the judgement that the disputed land be divided among both Hindu and Muslim parties in the ratio of 2/3^rd to Hindus parties and 1/3^rd to Muslim parties. Against this judgement of HC, the main Muslim party Sunni Waqf Board, appealed to SC against this judgement claiming that full property of disputed site where once Babri Masjid stood belongs to them.

In the recent times SC bench started to hear this case on regular basis, from the earlier 3 Judge bench during the tenure of earlier SC Chief Justice (CJI), the present  CJI reconstituted the bench, and new bench consisted of 5 judges. This present bench put the case on fast track and concluded the hearing and arguments by mid October and delivered the historic verdict on 9^th Nov 2019. This issue was going on in various courts in the country for more than 100 years, and now the nation has got the judgement.

The salient points of the judgement are

-The disputed site in Ayodhaya in UP will be given to the Central Govt, and they will set up a trust within three months for construction of Lord Ram temple. The trust will manage the temple’s construction.

-The Muslim Parties will be given a Five Acre suitable plot in Avodhaya.

– The verdict by the five judge bench was unanimous.

-SC said that Ram Lalla, as a deity, can bbe juristic entity. However the birth place (Janam Bhoomi) can not be juristic entity.

-The SC dismisses the Single Leave petition filed by Shia Waqf board challenging 1946 Faizabad Court order. This order stated that the property where Babri Masjid is located belonged to Sunni sect and not Shias.

-The Centre has  been asked to grant representation in the Trust to Nirmohi Akhara if deemed fit by Govt. Nirmohi Akhara was allotted 1/3rd part of land by Allahabad HC in their judgment of 2010.

-Nirmohi Akhara suit claiming shebait rights has been time barred and hence dismissed. Shebit is someone, who seeks the perpetual rights to worship at particular religious site, and the management of same also.

– The 5 judge bench who delivered the judgemeent consisted of Ranjan Gogoi (outgoing CJI), Justices SA Bobde (CJI designate), DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer.

There were few observations in this judgement, which are noteworthy

On Ramjanamstan- birth place of Lord Ram- in the addendum of the judgement it is mentioned that in period prior to year 1528 AD “ there was sufficient texts, which led Hindus to believe the present site as the birth place of Lord Ram. And the addendum concludes with

“ Faith and belief of the Hindus as depicted by the evidence on record clearly establish that at the birth place of Lord Ram, where  the Mosque was constructed and three dome structure is birth place of Lord Ram. The fact that Hindus were, by constructing iron wall, dividing the mosque premises, kept outside the 3 dome structure can not altar the faith and belief regarding birth place of Lord Ram. The worship on the outside chabutra in the outer courtyard was symbolic worship of Lord Ram who was believed to be born in the premises.”

SC on findings of Archaeological Survey of India (ASI)- While SC said “that the title claims can not be based on archaeological findings, but this evidence can not be brushed aside as mere conjecture and hypothesis. The SC stated that while the ASI report did not mention the presence of a pre existing structure, the report has left unanswered whether a Hindu temple had been demolished to build the mosque. Between the 12 the century to which the underlying structure(which was found by ASI) is dated and the construction of mosque in 16^th century, there is an intervening period of 4 centuries. No evidence has been place on record in relation to the course of human history between 12^th & 16^th centuries”. They further added that the mosque was not built on new land, because of presence of underlying structures.

As per SC  Muslims failed to prove possession- SC stated that Sunni Waqf board has stated that the mosque was constructed in the 16th century, but  there was no evidence of possessions or use till 19^th century. It also stated that travelogues in the 17^th  and 18^th century provide a detailed account of worship at the deity’s said place of birth. The SC added that there is evidence for the worship of Hindus in the outer as well inner courtyard. SC further added that the Muslims have offered no evidence to indicate that they were in exclusive possession of the inner structure prior to 1857 since the date of construction in 16^th century.

Most of the political parties and eminent scholars from both the sides have accepted this verdict of SC very gracefully, barring The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and the political party headed by  Asaduddin Owaisi. The main petitioner Sunni Waqf board gave the statement  that although they  are not happy with the verdict but they will not go in for review petition. AIMPLB spoke person said that after studying the complete verdict they will take the call whether to go in for review petition or not, although their advocate Jilani, first reacted that he will go in for review.

Now the ball in the centre’s court to form the trust, and what will be nature of that trust and who will be trustees of this trust, and how the temple will be constructed is to be seen. The Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) has declared that they are ready with the blue print of grand temple, but whether the designated trust will accept this design can not be said at this stage.

Congress party, which was all the time was behind the Muslim organisation during this case and few of the eminent congressmen like Kapil Sibal & Abhishek Manu Sanghvi who happened to be SC advocate represented Muslim organisations in this case. The reaction from Congress party on the verdict of this case has been very luke warm, few of their leaders said they respect the judgement by SC, but on the whole their reaction was very guarded.

So in the end the curtain came down on this case, which  was in the various courts of the country for more than a century.

Waiting for your views/feed backs/comments.

Anil Malik

Mumbai, India

11^th Nov 2109