The result of current cultural rituals on the 60- year-old Ayodhya case seems to be dangerous to the people of country which will be disclosed on 24th of September, 2010 a decision that may trigger political fallout. In Ayodhya, around the demolished Babri mosque whether Hindus or Muslims own land judgment haunted by memories of a 1992 riot, some of the country’s worst violence since the partition.
On Wednesday afternoon, the registrar of the Lucknow bench of Allahabad High Court issued a notice in which an announcement to that effect was communicated. On July 26, 2010 a special full bench comprises Justices S.U Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and D.V Sharma reserved the date for pronouncement of the judgment that was conveyed to the counsels appearing in the four title suits relating to the disputed site at Ayodhya. Three issues will be addressed by the court. First is whether there was a temple at the disputed site, prior to 1538. Second one is whether the suit filed by the Babri committee in 1961 is barred by limitation and last one is whether Muslims perfected their title through adverse possession. The fourth and fifth is for declaration and possession.
In 1950, Gopal Singh Visharad filed the first title by seeking an injunction for permitting ‘pooja’ (worship) of Lord Ram at the disputed site. Paramhans Tamchandra Das filed the second suit in 1950 by seeking the same injunction but this was later withdrawn. In the year 1959, Nirmohi Akhara filed the third suit, seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site from the receiver. UP Sunni Central Board of Waqfs filed the fourth suit for declaration and possession of the site in the year 1961. For declaration and possession, the fifth suit was moved on July one, 1989 in the name of Bhagwan Shree Ram Lalla Virajman.
A verdict for the Hindus would force the government to uphold the judgment, making it unpopular with Muslims, a key vote bloc. A ruling for the Muslims would mean the government would have to push Hindu groups out of the site, a political minefield. The response of BJP to the verdict Whether the party has been able to change with the times or not will be determined by the response of BJP to the verdict so as to capture the mood of young, modern India. The country, most political observers believe, has travelled a long way from the belligerent cries of ‘Jai Shri Ram’ and ‘Mandir wahin banayenge’ (we will build the temple at the disputed site), when a section of the middle class and poor worried about apparent denial of justice to the majority community.
In the Faizabad civil court, four title suits remained pending if one of these suits has been withdrawn. In 1989 an application moved by then Advocate General of UP and all of these suits were transferred to the High Court. Since then speculation was rife not only over the possible date of the judgment, but also over its religious and political fallout as the issue has been influencing the country’s politics.
The Archaeological Survey of India has pointed to the existence of a massive structure in its report to the Court. Among the excavation yields, the report has mentioned stone and decorated bricks, mutilated sculpture of divine couple, carved architectural members including foliage patterns and circular shrine having pranjala (watershute), all indicating the existence of north Indian temples. During the early 16th century, it was over the top of this construction that Babri Masjid was constructed, concluded by the report. But the Sunni Central Waqf Board has been maintaining that the report is “vague and self-contradictory”.
The verdict may impact on one segment or the other whichever way the verdict goes. The Ramjanmabhoomi Trust has detained that the disputed land was the birthplace of Lord Ram while Muslim organisations contended that it was the site of a 16th century mosque built by the first Mughal emperor Babur in Ayodhya, about 120 km from Lucknow. Rival claims by Hindu and Muslim groups to the disputed site led to the demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid by Hindu mobs Dec 6, 1992, triggering widespread communal violence that left thousands dead across the country.
Due to differed verdict, Ayodhya verdict has been postponed to September 28 by the court. Tight Securities, closed circuit television cameras, road blocks and barricades all go waste now. To anticipate a tense condition, the large scale arrangements done across the country, were appear to be just to say that the judgment is delayed. It was scheduled to be delivered tomorrow by the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court. All the precautions had been taken by the government, asking ministers to monitor the condition in their area and stepping up vigil around sensitive places, banned bulk SMSes and MMSes to stop cellphones turning handy for mischief-mongers looking to spread rumors, distribute objectionable content and make panic all go in vain.
Because of a plea submitted to the Supreme Court, the judgment was postponed asking that the judgment be postponed citing it could lead to communal violence. Earlier this week, A retired bureaucrat, Ramesh Chand Tripathi filed t he plea. At the end of this month, one of the High Court judges hearing the case in Lucknow retires. The entire trial may have to be conducted again in case the verdict is not delivered before that. Before fixing its next date of hearing, the Supreme Court took this into account for deferment to September 28.
Babri Masjid Demolition Pictures:
Video of Demolition of Babri Masjid from YouTube:
Video of Babri Masjid Demolition Full Video – Babri Masjid Verdict 2010 from YouTube: