VERDICT AND AFTER
Sign in
  • BLOG
  • Editor's Picks
  • |
  • Technology
  • |
  • Entrepreneurship
  • |
  • Business
  • |
  • Finance
  • |
  • Career
  • |
  • New India
  • |
  • Entertainment
  • |
  • Others

    • VERDICT AND AFTER
    The country was waiting with batted eyelids the judicial verdict on the title suit of a piece of land at Ayodhya lingering in for 6 decades. the dispute to title of the property was between Sunni Wakf Board, A muslim body, who were claiming the ownership by virtue of the fact that a mosque was built there years ago before it was raged down by karsevaks in 1992 and some Hindu sect who claimed it to be the birth place of Lord Ram and the third litigant was Ram Lulla, the god himself represented by a trust. This is permissible under Indian Laws and there is no time bar for such suits as ruled by the Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high Court which pronounced a landmark verdict while rejecting the title claims of all the litigants simultaneously advocating trifurcation of the properties to be divided between the the three litigants as a compromise formula. this was by far the wisest judgment ever delivered even if it is fully based on religious faith and beliefs. All the judges have concurred that the disputed place is believed to be the birth place of Lord Ram and respected the majority sentiment and belief even though apart from ASI findings, which established that the mosque was built on temple ruins, there was no other adducing proof to declare it as the birth place of Ram. Even as Harsh Mander pointed out, Tulsidas who authored Ramayan has not claimed so and again there are many other temples in Ayoydhya which claimed to be the birth place of Ram.

    Some senior advocates like Anil Dhawan, Anthyarjuna, feel that this judgment is like a panchayat style and supreme court should settle this issue based on evidences and faith should not override judicial considerations etc. Eminent historian Pramila Thapar also came down heavily on the judgment and so did CPM General Secretary Prakash Karat.

    Let us consider the issue of faith. What if the judgment is based on religious faith ? Recently the last CJI Mr. Balakrishnan advised the Union of India to find an alternate route for Sethusamudram cannel without cutting in to Adam's bridge believed to be Ram Sethu or bridge built by Lord Ram's army of monkeys. This the supreme Court observed was in response to respecting the faith of millions of people.  The holy shrine of Hazratbal claims to have a hair of Prophet Mohammad, the holy church of turin claims to possess the last robe of Jesus before his crucifixion. These are all faiths with no corroborating evidences.Even the concept of immaculate conception is also a religious belief. will any one dare to question them at all. What if a hindu faith that Lord Ram was born at a particular place in a disputed place is respected and judgment delivered? In a way the judgment has paved the way for a just and noble settlement of a row spanning over decades with a face saving formula. this has opened up avenues for a reconciliation efforts besides the court and judicial process. Why is that this fact not appreciated except to whip up communal frenzy once again. Playing the minority card will be counter productive. One of the learned judges a muslim by faith Justice Khan has observed if Dec 6 , 1992 is repeated we can not come out of that carnage yet again. Let peace prevail. Let the hindu and Muslim brethern of Ayodhya settle this issue amicably without any political intervention. For God's sake, Lawyers, intelligentia, Historians, Politicans keep of this issue for some more time. 
    start_blog_img