|
Home
Search
Subscribe Online
Archives
About
Us
Cartoons
Online
Book Store
E-Greetings
Jobs @ MG
Advertise
on MG
Our
Team
Contact Us
Muslim
Matrimonials
Our Advertisers
| |
Ayodhya case takes new turn
By P.M. Damodaran
 Lucknow:
The Ayodhya case has taken a new turn. The Supreme Court has issued
notices to the Uttar Pradesh government and the Central Bureau of
Investigation (CBI) on petitions seeking the revival of the prosecution of
union ministers, Mr. L.K. Advani, Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi and Ms. Uma
Bharati and five other Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) and Bharatiya Janata
Party leaders in the case of the demolition of the disputed structure in
Ayodhya in December 1992. The Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court on
February 12 had quashed the trial of the accused in the case maintaining
that the notification for trial issued by the state government was
defective and improper.
The fact is that a case was filed against the eight accused, including the
three union ministers, soon after the demolition of the disputed Babri
Mosque structure on December 6, 1992. The CBI added a few more names to
the list of accused a few months later. The High Court on February 12 this
year set aside the trial of the eight accused persons on the technical
ground that the CBI had not received the prior permission of the court
before adding the names to the list.
The High Court had not given any clean chit to the accused persons in the
case. On the contrary, the High Court's observation that the remedy was
curable itself had proved that the accused persons had not been let off.
Moreover, a designated court in September 1997 had maintained that prima
facie there was sufficient evidence to frame charges against the accused
persons.
The apex court has issued notices to the UP government and the CBI asking
them to file their replies within four weeks on a petition filed by a
columnist Mr. Kuldip Nayyar and a Delhi-based organisation, Society for
Social Justice seeking revival of prosecution proceedings against the
accused. The petitioners had challenged the February 12 order of the
single judge of the High Court on the ground that the accused persons
should not be allowed to go scot-free on a 'trifle technical ground'.
They had contended that the minor technicalities in notification could not
be allowed to be trampled upon the rule of law and the course of justice
and maintained that it was a fit case for the apex court to interfere as
the offence committed by the accused was serious. Pointing out that the
High Court itself had observed the mistake was curable, the petitioners
have now sought the apex court's direction to the state government to
issue a fresh notification so that a proper trial of the accused could be
held.
The state Chief Minister, Mr. Rajnath Singh had always been maintaining
that his government was not bound to issue a fresh notification unless it
was specifically directed by the court to do so. The state government is
also taking the stand that it could not go ahead with the issuing of a
fresh notification till the CBI, the investigating agency, had requested
it to do so. True to the stand taken by the Chief Minister, the state
government did not issue any fresh notification for the trial of the
accused more than nine months after the High Court delivered its verdict.
On the part of the CBI, which is under direct charge of the Prime
Minister, one did not obviously expect it to seek of the trial of the Home
Minister and others. But now when Mr. Singh says that his government will
honour the Supreme Court directive, he was telling only the obvious as he
cannot disobey the judicial orders.
On the other hand, the Ayodhya issue may figure prominently in the winter
session of Parliament which began on November 19. The opposition parties
are agitated over the government's failure to take action against the VHP
leaders, including Mr. Ashok Singhal, who had trespassed into the
prohibited area in Ayodhya on October 17. Though the Prime Minister, Mr.
A.B. Vajpayee and the U.P. Chief Minister had described the incident as
unfortunate and a security lapse, the government had not initiated any
action against the trespassers despite the fact that they themselves had
admitted their guilt.
The barging into the prohibited area by the VHP leaders had come in the
wake of the organisation's decision to begin the construction of the Ram
Temple in Ayodhya by March 12 next year, which virtually coincides with
the Assembly elections in four states, including in Uttar Pradesh. After
the violation by the VHP leader, only a FIR was filed against them under
section 186 of the Cr. P.C., which is only a non-cognizable offence. No
severe action like the arrest of the accused persons should be taken under
this section. With the Assembly elections only less than three months
away, the political parties are unlikely to desist from raising the issue
in Parliament to take political mileage. q |
Subscribe
Now
|
