Introduction
Prime Minister Narendra Modi will lay the foundation stone, a 40 kg silver brick, at the construction site of Ram Temple at Ayodhya on 05 August 2020.
The said event marks the culmination of a sustained political campaign by the Bharatiya Janata Party, for a temple to be built on the spot believed to be the birthplace of Lord Ram.
These 2.77 acres of land in the city of Ayodhya, located in Faizabad district of Uttar Pradesh has been a focus of dispute between the Hindus and Muslims since the 18th century.
Let us study the chronology of events, to understand as to why this event is so important, especially for the present dispensation.
Contours of the Dispute
1528 – Babur invaded India in 1527 and built a mosque at Ayodhya, allegedly after demolishing a Hindu temple. It was popularly called ‘Babri Masjid’.
1853 – First ever recorded communal clash over the site, which forced the British to put a fence around the site. They denominated separate areas of worship for Hindus and Muslims in 1859. The site existed in this form for the next 90 years.
1949 – The workers of the Hindu right wing organisation forced its way and placed Ram Idols inside the mosque. Both sides to the dispute filed civil suits for ownership of the Plot no 583. The administration locked the gates and declared the area disputed.
1984 – The movement to build a temple at the disputed site gathered momentum and Hindu groups formed a committee to spearhead the construction of a temple at the Ramjanmabhoomi site.
1986 – A district judge ordered the gates of the mosque to be opened after almost five decades to allow Hindus to worship inside the “disputed structure.” Consequently, a Babri Mosque Action Committee was formed as Muslims protested the move to allow Hindu prayers at the site.
1989 – In November, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad laid foundations of a temple on land adjacent to the “disputed structure” in the presence of Home Minister Sh Boota Singh and then Chief Minister Sh ND Tiwari.
1990 – A coalition government under PM VP Singh was formed at the centre with a major support from BJP. In order to consolidate its political position better, the then BJP president Lal Krishna Advani took out a cross-country rathyatra to garner support for the move to build a Ram temple at the site. He was arrested in Bihar during the rathyatra and as a consequence, BJP withdrew its support from the centre government, bringing the government down.
1991 – Congress came to power at the centre after elections, while BJP became the major opposition party at the centre. The BJP at that time had power in many states such as Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Himachal Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Kalyan Singh became the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh.
1992 – Kalyan Singh took steps to support the Ram janambhoomi movement such as making entry into area easier, promising no firing on Karsevaks, opposing decision of central government to send Central Police force in the area, etc. Meanwhile, several rounds of not so meaningful meetings were held between Babri Masjid Action Committee and VHP leaders in presence of the home minister.
06 December 1992 – The VHP and its associates, including the BJP, organised a rally involving 150,000 VHP and BJP kar sevaks at the site of the mosque. Fiery speeches were delivered by the BJP leaders such as Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharti. Despite a commitment from the state government to the Supreme Court that the mosque would not be harmed, the mob demolished the mosque. More than 2000 people were killed in the riots that followed the demolition. The Congress government at the Centre, headed by PV Narasimha Rao, set up a commission of inquiry under Justice Liberhan.
2002 – Communal tension continued over the years. At least 58 people were killed in Godhra, Gujarat, in an attack on a train believed to be carrying Hindu volunteers from Ayodhya. The communal riots that followed the Godhra incident in Gujarat led to over 2000 people dead.
2003 – The court ordered the Geological Survey of India to find out whether a temple of Lord Ram existed on the site. In August, the survey presented evidence of a temple under the mosque. Muslim groups disputed the findings.
2005 – A group of five terrorists attacked the makeshift temple on 05 July 2005. All five were shot dead in the ensuing gunfight with the Central Reserve Police Force personnel and one civilian was killed by a grenade thrown by a terrorist to breach the cordoned wall.
The Legal Battle for Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid
The crux of the said dispute was hinged to the land title-ship rights of a plot of 2.77 acres of land in the city of Ayodhya, located in Faizabad district of Uttar Pradesh.
The Hindus believe that this very spot was the birth place of lord Ram and a mosque was built by Babur after destroying their most holy temple that existed at that location in 1528.
The contention of the Muslims on the other hand is that the Babri Mosque was one of the largest and the most sacred mosques in Uttar Pradesh, which has a sizable Muslim population, was illegally destroyed by the workers of the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) and its associates, including the BJP on 06 December 1992.
Subsequent to the destruction of the mosque, a land title case was lodged in the Allahabad High Court, the verdict of which was pronounced on 30 September 2010.
Parties Involved in the Case
There were three parties involved in this case and each of them presented a different demand to the court.
Nirmohi Akhara– A religious denomination that was in the favor of constructing a Ram Temple on the disputed land and had also appealed the court to give it the management rights of the premises.
Ram Lalla– A representative of Hindu Mahasabha who wanted the ownership and other rights of the entire disputed land without any part going to Muslim parties or the Nirmohi Akhara.
The Sunni Waqf Board– This Board looks after the religious properties of Muslims had demanded that the Babri Masjid be restored to its original form that existed before the Hindu groups brought it down on December 6, 1991.
Judgement of Allahabad High Court
The three judges of The Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres of Ayodhya land be divided into three parts:
The first part was allotted to the site of the Ramlala idol (birthplace of lord Ram), which was assigned to the party representing ‘Ram LallaVirajman’ who could install Infant Ram deity in that location.
The second part was allocated to the Nirmohi Akhara, who as per mythological belief, stand for the construction of Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabutara at that location.
The third part was given to the Sunni Wakf Board for the construction of the mosque.
Although, the above stated landmark judgement of the High Court was an important step towards the resolution of the long outstanding dispute, but all the three parties were not satisfied with the ruling to split the land and appealed against it in the Supreme Court.
The Supreme Court on 09 May 2011 stayed the High Court order that had ruled splitting the disputed site into three parts and said that status quo will remain.
Subsequently, the honourable Supreme Court on 21 March 2017 called upon all the stake holders to look for an amicable, out-of-court settlement for the ongoing dispute over the Ram Temple rather than on insisting for a judicial pronouncement.
Notwithstanding, the Supreme Court had fixed the date of 08th February 2018 for hearing of cross petitions filed against the Allahabad High Court’s 2010 verdict in the politically-sensitive Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case.
Finally, the Supreme Court set a deadline of 17 October 2019 for finishing arguments in the Ayodhya land tile dispute case and hearing on a daily basis commenced from 06th August in the top court.
Final Verdict of Supreme Court
The Supreme Court finally announced the much-awaited verdict in the Ayodhya Ram Mandir- Babri Masjid dispute. The SC gave disputed land to Ram Lalla and ordered the government to allot a five-acre plot to Muslims at some other place so that they can construct a new mosque.
The five-judge Constitution bench led by Ranjan Gogoi- Chief Justice of India decided to give the disputed land to Hindus and ordered the Centre to form a trust to look into the site management.
Highlights of the judgment made by the Supreme Court
- According to the Supreme Court, the ASI report cannot be dismissed as it was not just guesswork but has brought the theories of pre-existence of an Idgah on the disputed land. The ASI report says that the Babri Masjid was not constructed on vacant land.
- The SC stated that the Allahabad High Court was wrong to divide the land between the three involved parties because the complex was a composite whole.
- The entire area, which is 2.77 acres, will remain with the Hindus and it will be handed over to a trust for managing the construction of a temple.
- 5 acres of land will be given to Muslims in a prominent place. It can also be in the 67 acres locked down in and around the disputed land.
- SC stated that all religions are equal under the Indian constitution and the constitution does not allow anyone to distinguish between them. Even the judges have not been given any rights.
- A huge temple under Masjid cannot become the basis for giving ownership. SC said that courts must go by evidence.
- The Shia Muslims plea for ownership of the land was abandoned.
How the Supreme Court used the powers it received under section 142 of the Constitution?
Article 142 of the constitution was invoked twice by the five-judge bench while delivering the verdict in the Ayodhya case. Article 142 gives special powers to the Supreme Court to pass any order for the purpose of doing complete justice.
The Article says: “Enforcement of decrees and orders of Supreme Court and unless as to discovery, etc (1) The Supreme Court in the exercise of its jurisdiction may pass such decree or make such order as is necessary for doing complete justice in any cause or matter pending before it, and any decree so passed or orders so made shall be enforceable throughout the territory of India in such manner as may be prescribed by or under any law made by Parliament and, until provision in that behalf is so made, in such manner as the President may by order prescribe.”
– The court invoked Article 142 to grant 5 acres of land to Muslims for building a mosque. The court said the constitution must ensure to rectify what is committed wrong.
– It also invoked the Article to grant relief to Nirmohi Akhara saying that it would be included in the trust that is to be formed by the Centre to construct Temple on the disputed land.
Conclusion
The commencement of construction of Ram Temple at Ayodhya will bring a closure to a matter that was often used by politicians to whip-up religious sentiments for electoral gains.
Praying to Ram and Allah for a lasting peace now!!