In India, the people may forget their own near and dear ones but not the things driven by their religion. It is the land where a person can befool anyone anywhere without any hindrances. Most of the people are not enough mature to understand the know how’s of anything. Maximum folks are the die-hard fans of all those so called leaders, preachers who made them emotional, in other words the one who are emotionally blackmailing the people are the actual leaders and preachers here in this country plus India is the land of all cultures, religions etc etc, even as per Indian Home minister Rajnath Singh besides all the sects of Hindus and other religions, the Muslims belonging to 72 sects of Islam are living in the country, which even Muslims don’t know.
There is a place we know as Ayodhiya from last many years. The area was actually one among the off the scene places but in the year 1992. The bakhts from many parts India marched the area and burnt down the structure erected, modified by the Mughal emperor Babur in 935 AH, was actually a Mosque of their Muslim counterparts known as Babri Masjid. The Bakhts introduced themselves as Karsevakas butchered infinite number of people and claimed the area the birth place of their God Ram, renamed and engraved the name on the minds of all their men as Ram Janbhumi.
While going through the Wikipedia what I found is interesting as apart from Hindus Jains (those following Jainism) and Buddhists (Lord Buddha followers) also claimed the site. According to Jains the Mosque was built over a 6th century Jain Temple, similarly Udit Raj’s Buddha Education Foundation has claimed the Mosque was built over a Buddhist Shrine. But Jains and Buddhists left it all to Hindus and Muslims. As per the claims of Bakhts, their God Ram had taken birth in Ayodhiya and the place got renamed as Ram Janambudhi and on the other side the structure was named after Mughal Emperor Babar.
It was all under the control of Muslims till 1853 when a group of armed Hindu ascetics belonging to the Nirmohi Akhara captured and occupied the site, and claimed ownership of the structure and for the next two years ‘violence’ remained there in the area. Initially the construction of was not permitted but in the year 1855 a boundary wall was constructed which inturn gave the area a disputed nature and Hindus the Temple. Mosque got divided into two parts Outer side the Ram Chabutra and inner the Babri Masjid, the primary name
Hindus once again launched an effort to built a Temple and as expected Muslims resist and on 19th January 1885 the same was prohibited by the Deputy Commissioner. In the year 1934 Hindu-Muslims riots took place over a cow slaughter scene in which a wall and dome of the Mosque got damaged but were later reconstructed by the British government.
Just some two years after India’s Independence. Hindus fundamentalist organization Akhil Bhartiya Ramayana Mahasabha organized organized an eight day pooja Ramacharitimanas outside the Mosque and the 9th day they placed their idols of Rama and Sita inside the Mosque nd the very next day announced on public systems that it had all happened miraculously. When Hindus started visiting the place for Darshan, the gates were locked.
It was in the tenure of Rajiv Gandhi when the Mosque gained a bit function as a Hindu Temple when the gates were unlocked and Hindus were permitted.
1989, the same year when Kashmir starting startling India from north but from centre it were their own people before the 1989 elections Vishwa Hindu Parishad got permission for a pooja ‘Shilanyas’ there in the platform and it were Bhartiya Janta Party’s LK Advani, who started the rath yatra to Ayodhiya and finally in the year 1992, 06th December, the Mosque was demolished by the Bakhts, the so called Karsevaks and their act worsened the situation all over India and as per reports to be believed some 2000 people lost their lives, among which two were from Kashmir, 06th and 11th standard students killed on the train by Karsewaks.
The case reached the court again, aftermath the commission set up by government blamed some 68 persons included the one who had started the rath yatra LK Advani, and among the others were Atal Bihari Vajpayee and Kalyan Singh.
A land title case on the site was lodged in the Allahabad High Court, the verdict of which was pronounced on 30 September 2010. In their verdict, the three judges of The Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres (1.12 ha) of Ayodhya land be divided into 3 parts, with 1/3 going to the Ram Lalla or Infant Lord Rama represented by the Hindu Maha Sabha for the construction of the Ram Temple, 1/3 going to the Islamic Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining 1/3 going to a Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara. While the three-judge bench was not unanimous that the disputed structure was constructed after demolition of a Temple, it did agree that a Temple or a Temple structure predated the Mosque at the same site. The excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India were heavily used as evidence by the court that the predating structure was a massive Hindu religious building.
On May 4, 2001, Special Judge, Lucknow, Shrikant Shukla dropped the conspiracy charge against Advani and 20 others on the ground that Crime 197 — the Special Court was only trying this crime — was only regarding the actual demolition and not the hatching of any conspiracy. On May 20, 2010, the High Court upheld Judge Shukla’s order while dismissing the CBI’s revision petition.
Arguing before the Supreme Court in its appeal on February 19, 2011, the CBI submitted that Judge Shukla made an “artificial distinction” in the demolition case in order to drop the names of Mr. Advani and the 20 others for the reason that they did not participate in the “actual demolition”. The CBI called for a joint trial of both Crime nos. 197 and 198 like how they did previously.
On March 20 this year the Supreme Court suggested an amicable settlement of the contentious Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, calling it a better course than on insisting on judicial pronouncement. The court’s proposal rekindled the decades-old dispute, triggering spirited responses from all the parties involved.
While the NDA government led by the BJP hailed the Supreme Court’s proposal – Union Minister Mahesh Sharma called it “superb” – Muslim organisations, including the Babri Masjid Action Committee were sceptical, saying attempts at an out-of-court settlement of the dispute in the past have been unsuccessful.
LK Advani party member and now MP Subramaniyam Swamy came up with a ‘Baghwan’ like suggestion that the Temple should be built while Masjid could be moved to other side of Saryu river to resolve the issue and was endorsed by his mate Mahesh Sharma, but couldn’t utter a word about those found guilty and the justice who got killed.
Dattatreya Hosabale, senior RSS functionary had said it will support the decision taken by ‘Dharam Sansad’, which organised the Ram Janambhumi movement. “It (Ram Temple issue) is to be decided by the Dharam Sansad as they are the people who organised the entire Ram Janambhumi movement and the parties who went to the court. RSS will not decide. RSS will go by the Dharam Sansad’s decision. The issue should be settled at the earliest and a grand Temple should be erected through the involvement of all Indians. The Babri Masjid Action Committee, was not sure.
Now we will throw a bit light on a bit secular India.
Hyderabad MP Asaduddin Owaisi said the case was about title. “Please remember, the Babri Masjid case is about title which the Allahabad High Court wrongly decided as a Partnership case. Hence the appeal in apex court,” he tweeted.
Owaisi is a member of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), which had challenged in the Supreme Court the 2010 verdict of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, directing that the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmbhoomi disputed site be divided into three parts.
Owaisi hoped that the Supreme Court would decide the other cases pending since the demolition of Babri Msjid in 1992. “I hope Supreme Court decides the contempt petition pending since 1992,” he tweeted. “Waiting to hear about whether conspiracy charges will be held against (BJP leaders LK) Advani, (Murli Manohar) Joshi, Uma Bharati in Babri demolition case,” he said.
As per the reports Justice Rohinton Nariman, who made remarks about reviving the criminal conspiracy charge against BJP veteran L.K. Advani and other top leaders, including Union Minister Uma Bharti, during the previous hearing of the Babri Masjid demolition case, was not a part of the Supreme Court Bench on Wednesday.
On March 6, Justice Nariman, who was sitting as a judge along with Justice P.C. Ghose, remarked that “there was something peculiar going on in this case” and opened the floor for initiating a debate on reopening the criminal conspiracy charge against BJP leaders. The court was hearing a CBI appeal against the dropping of the conspiracy charge against them.
On Wednesday, the Bench was sitting in a combination of Justices Ghose and the newly-appointed Justice Dipak Gupta.
Justice Rohinton Nariman was heading a Bench in court 13 with Justice P.C. Pant.
When the Babri matter came up for hearing, Justice Ghose said the case may be adjourned as it was part-heard.
“My brother [J. Nariman] is not present. The case is part-heard,” Justice Ghose said.
Senior advocate K.K. Venugopal, appearing for Mr. Advani, asked the case to come up after four weeks.
“That would be in May…” Justice Ghose disapproved. The judge is retiring on May 27.
Justice Ghose then agreed to hear the matter on March 23 with Justice Nariman by his side on the Bench.
The sudden turn of events on March 6 came on an appeal filed by the CBI in 2011, during the UPA era, in the Supreme Court against the dropping of the conspiracy charge against Mr. Advani and other leaders like Ms. Bharti, Murli Manohar Joshi, Vinay Katiyar, Sadvi Ritambara, Giriraj Kishore and Vishnu Hari Dalmia.
The Babri Masjid demolition case stemmed from two crime files: Crime No: 197/1992 and Crime No: 198/1992. Both were filed shortly after the disputed structure of Babri Masjid was demolished on December 6, 1992.
Crime no. 197/1992 was registered in the Ayodhya Police Station against “lakhs of unknown kar sevaks”. This FIR dealt with the actual demolition of the masjid. It lined up a bunch of serious offences, including robbery or dacoity with attempt to commit murder,causing hurt by an act endangering life or safety of others, deterring public servants from doing duty and promoting enmity between different religious groups. The most severe of these offences could get the offender up to 10 years in jail.
The second one, Crime no. 198/1992, was registered against 12 persons, including Ashok Singhal, Mr. Giriraj Kishore, Mr. Advani, Mr. Joshi, Mr. Dalmiya, Mr. Katiyar, Ms. Bharati and Sadhvi Ritambara, who were on the dais at the ”Ram Katha Kunj” when the masjid was being demolished.
They were accused of promoting enmity, making imputations and assertions prejudicial to national integration and statements conducing to public mischief. Maximum punishment, if found guilty for these offences, was up to five years’’ imprisonment. The cases are being tried in courts in Lucknow and Rae Bareilly, respectively.
The CBI took over Crime 197 in Lucknow, while 198 remained with the State CID in Rae Bareilly. Eventually 198 also got transferred to the CBI and began being heard in the Lucknow court.
Now, with the CBI investigating both crimes as one, a joint charge sheet was filed on October 5, 1993 accusing Mr. Advani and the other leaders of conspiracy.
The CBI charge sheet alleged that a secret meeting took place at the residence of Mr. Katiyar on the eve of the demolition, during which the final decision to bring down the disputes structure was taken. The Special Judicial Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Court also found the conpsiracy prima facie tenable.
However, in February 2001, the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court found a technical error in the manner Crime 198 was transferred to the CBI without consulting the High Court. Though it did not touch upon the conspiracy charge against the leaders, the High Court asked the Uttar Pradesh government to correct the flaw. Subsequent governments failed to act and Crime 198 finally got detached and returned to Rae Bareilly.
On May 4, 2001, Special Judge, Lucknow, Shrikant Shukla dropped the conspiracy charge against Advani and 20 others on the ground that Crime 197 — the Special Court was only trying this crime — was only regarding the actual demolition and not the hatching of any conspiracy. On May 20, 2010, the High Court upheld Judge Shukla’s order while dismissing the CBI’s revision petition.
Arguing before the Supreme Court in its appeal on February 19, 2011, the CBI submitted that Judge Shukla made an “artificial distinction” in the demolition case in order to drop the names of Mr. Advani and the 20 others for the reason that they did not participate in the “actual demolition”. The CBI called for a joint trial of both Crime nos. 197 and 198 like how they did previously.
Till gaining the power in Uttar Pradesh Yogi Adityanath was in actual anti judiciary and continuously tweeting anti-judiciary tweets from his old twitter handler and soon after gaining the power his party Bhartiya Janta Party through their official twitter handler tweeted his official twitter account.
Aditya Menon, @AdityaMenon22 the associate editor at catch news tweeted: If Karsewaks had any respect for the law of the land, Babri Masjid would still be standing.
Managing editor of financial express MK Venu, @mkvenu1 from his verified twitter account tweeted: SC wants dispute about Ram Temple on Babri site to be resolved by two communities. Can courts also speed up demolition case and book guilty?
Murali Krishnan, @legaljournalist the associate editor at Barand Bench before a day tweeted while tiking the flaw in justice system tweeted: Justice Nariman who made some strong remarks in Babri Masjid demolition case at the last hearing is not on Bench tomorrow due to roster change.
Ankur Bhardwaj, @Bhayankur in his tweets said that the Supreme court has asked Cricket to be handed over and has asked an issue like Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi to be taken elsewhere, think about it.
In his another tweet he said, since day 1, the Hindutva fundamentalists have maintained that a court can’t decide matters of faith, now, Supreme Court has stamped approval over it.
The author is a civil engineering student and is a freelance writer, actively involved in awaring the students about competitive examinations.
Facebook: jaifz
Twitter: @jaifz
Email: a9jaifishfaq@gmail.com