Babri Mosque Fiasco: The Politico-Legal Battle That Has Transcended Centuries

Must Read

Dear PM Modi, Are you telling Muslims to leave India?

Today I called my housemaid in India and inquired about her well-being. Her first response was: ‘Ye log Musalaman...

Re-establishing Diplomatic Ties between India and Libya

In view of the prevailing travel ban to Libya by the government of India imposed in 2016, the Union...

Female Genital Mutilation: A Yearning for Culpability in India

A girl was happy that today her mother offered to take her to the movies. This 7-year old girl...

Haj Subsidy Ban and Secular Character of Constitution

For long, the Indian state has practiced the unconstitutional sin of opting for Haj subsidy to continue. For long,...

Instant Triple Talaq and Criminalization of it: Stifling the Rights of Individuals

What instant Triple talaq is to ‘Muslim wives’, criminalization of it is to ‘Muslim husbands’. The former has been sacredly...

Taj Mahal in Storm of History and Propaganda

The radiance of Taj Mahal, at the moment, is blurred not by deterioration in climatic conditions but by the...

Follow us

With the number of cases pending in the Supreme Court of India, it would not be an overstatement to assert that the ‘test of time’ is a concept foreign to Indian cases. Indian judiciary has, to its credit, cases stretching across centuries. One such case is that of the Babri Mosque that has had new developments from time to time. It has had politicians, lawyers, activists, academicians, etc.; wrap their heads around the issue for years and base their careers on it.

Constructed in 1528 (according to a widely held belief) by Mir Baqi on the orders of the Mughal emperor Babur, the mosque became a bone of contention between the Hindu community that claims that it had been built on the foundations of a temple which was the birthplace of Rama in Ayodhya; and the Muslim community that denies these claims. In 1853, first incident of communal violence was recorded at the disputed site. Thereafter, in the year 1853, British officials erected a fence allowing Muslims to use the inner court while permitting the Hindus to use the outer court. 1885 saw Mahant Raghubir Das seeking permission to build a canopy on Ramchabootra but his plea was rejected by the Faizabad District Court. Even though India attained independence from the British rule in 1947, the internal strife continues to this day and has in fact escalated several times. In 1949, idol of Rama surfaced which, the Muslims claimed, was placed by the Hindus. This led both the parties to file civil suits. The Government declared the area as ‘disputed’ and locked the gates. Amidst the first title suit by Gopal Singh Visharad seeking the right to worship the idols, the State of UP appealing against the injunction order, Ramchandra Paramhans filing another suit and later withdrawing it, Nirmohi Akhara entering the scene and filing the third suit and UP Sunni Central Board of Waqfs moving in to claim possession of the mosque and the adjoining land; all these events stretching across the period of 1950-1961, a new tangent was added to this communally charged politico-legal battle. In 1989, another fresh suit was filed by a former VHP vice-president for the declaration of title and possession followed by VHP laying foundations of Ram Temple on the adjacent land. Following the partial damage to the Mosque done by VHP volunteers, the building was brought down by the volunteers/supporters of BJP, VHP and Shiv Sena on 6 December, 1992 which led to nation-wide communal tension which saw near about 2,000 people die.  In October, CBI filed a charge sheet accusing Advani and others of conspiracy. In December 1993, two FIRs were lodged, one against “unknown karsevaks” and the other alleging BJP leaders L. K. Advani, M M Joshi and others for ‘communal’ speeches. In 2001, Special CBI Court dropped proceedings against accused persons L K Advani, M M Joshi, Uma Bharti, Bal Thackeray, etc. After the Allahabad High Court order, CBI moved the Supreme Court against the HCs order. In 2015, the Supreme Court issued notices to L K Advani, M M Joshi, Uma Bharti and Kalyan Singh in response to a plea not to drop criminal conspiracy charges against the accused persons. On 6 April, 2017 the Supreme Court sought time-bound completion of the case and the latest development on 19 April is that the Supreme Court revived the criminal conspiracy charges against the accused persons under Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code.

[Timeline courtesy: http://indianexpress.com/article/india/babri-masjid-demolition-timeline-ayodhya-ram-mandir-advani-uma-bharti-mm-joshi-supreme-court-4619160/

http://www.livemint.com/Politics/WhGjiGPhQ8CQTQY1cmIt0I/Babri-Masjid-demolition-case-A-timeline-of-events.html]

Hatred is counter-intuitive to the idea of true religion. Let India witness peaceful coexistence in the face of whatever the Supreme Court rules in its decision on the Babri Mosque. The pluralistic ethos of India would have its D-Day when the sellout elements in either of the religions do not have the upper hand to hijack this situation to further their own petty gains.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Latest News

Himachal Pradesh High Court Supports Promotion Based on Seniority of Post Rather Based on the Eligibility Test

In the case of Ramesh Chand Versus State of Himachal Pradesh & Others, the petitioner, reached the court as he was aggrieved by the...

NCDRC Dismisses PIL against Urologist, Holy Family Hospital, Says Mode Of Treatment Or Skill Differs From Doctor To Doctor

The National Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dismissed a petition against Holy Family Hospital and a Urologist, alleging negligence in diagnosing the septicemia and...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Disposes Suit for Possession and Permanent Prohibitory Injunction Due To Mutual Consent

In the case of Parveen Kumar vs Smt. Vijay Laxmi and Ors, the Petitioner, Parveen had filed a suit for declaration, possession and a permanent prohibitory...

Supreme Court Appoints Committee To Examine Arbitrariness of Sealing of Resorts in Elephant Corridor, Tamil Nadu

A Full Bench headed by the Chief Justice of India, in the matter of Hospitality Association of Mudumalai V. In Defence of Environment and Animals...

Madhya Pradesh High Court Rules That Export Ban on N95 Masks & PPE Kits Does Not Violate Fundamental Right of Traders

The Madhya Pradesh High Court held that the formulation and regulation of trade policies were within the subjects of the Central Government. Any reasonable...

Delhi High Court Issues Notice To Two Pleas Filed Praying for Recognition of Same-Sex Marriage

The Court heard two writ petitions which urged that the Special Marriage Act and the Foreign Marriage Act be interpreted to also apply to...

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Challenging Allahabad High Court Order Granting Interim Bail on Medical Grounds

An appeal was filed before the Supreme Court, challenging the Judgment & Order of the Allahabad High Court in the matter of State of U.P...

Bombay High Court Allows Petition Seeking Lawyers and Legal Clerks To Travel in Local Trains

The present hearing arose out of a batch of Public Interest Litigations that was filed in the Bombay High Court to permit the members...

Provisions for Retirement of Teachers Must Be Read With the Larger Interest of Students in Mind: Supreme Court

Supreme Court in Navin Chandra Dhoundiyal v State of Uttarakhand reinstated the appellants to their position as Professor on basis of re-employment till the...

Parties Cannot Deny Specific Performance Merely Due To Delay: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, in Ferrodous Estate v P Gopirathnam, revisited the law on the specific performance of a contract. It reiterated that mere delay...

More Articles Like This

- Advertisement -