|
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
| |
Katiyar gives a new twist to Ayodhya case
New Delhi: BJP MP Vinay Katiyar has broken the monotony of his string of "I don't know" with what he called a "startling revelation" in his deposition before the Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry. The gist of his disclosure was that Babri Masjid demolition was "the result of rivalry between PV Narasimha Rao and Arjun Singh".
Responding to a question: where all Kar Seva was done on December 6, 1992?, Katiyar dramatically drew a rough plan showing three different compartments, one representing the area of three Babri domes, second representing Ram Chabutra and Sita Rasoi, and third the platform at the shilanyas site where the Ramjanambhoomi Nyas had a katha mandap, earlier known as Abhiram Das mandap. Katiyar said he had given the same map to PV Narasimha Rao in 1992 with a request that "symbolic kar seva" be allowed in the land near the third compartment since the area was not taken over by the government. "I made the request in order to keep both the sants and Rao happy," Katiyar explained. However, according to him, even after accepting the plan it could not be implemented because of rivalry between Kishore Kunal, a police officer from Bihar who was advising Rao on Ayodhya issue, and Naresh Chandra, head of Ayodhya cell in the Prime Minister's Office.
Rao wanted some time, said Katiyar, but instead went with this plan to court. Katiyar said: "Arjun Singh played his own game. He said Kashmiri terrorists have merged with kar sevaks. We asked him to carry out a strict check. But Singh wanted to kill two birds with one arrow — dislodge Rao as well as four BJP-run state governments. He succeeded. Our mandir was demolished and God was hurt." Katiyar underlined his statement with "this is the only truth about Ayodhya." Katiyar said:"We have not been able to finish stone work for even one section of the proposed temple in 10 years. In such a scenario, how could sadhus decide to demolish the temple and keep Ram in open?" He also contradicted his earlier testimony that he had nothing to do with Bajrang Dal now. "I am still an important functionary." q |
Subscribe
Now: MG
needs your support
|
