Ayodhya case in the apex court

The Ayodhya-dispute has taken a new turn with Allahabad High Court verdict having been challenged in the Supreme Court by Jamiat Ulema-i-Hind (JUH). Since the High Court verdict, various people and organizations have voiced their stand against it, JUH’s petition, filed by advocate Anis Suhrawardy, is the first one. It would not be surprising if in due course of time, more people and organizations follow suit, filing their respective petitions/appeals regarding the High Court verdict. They have the fundamental right to do so. Also, approaching the Indian judiciary to secure justice and legitimize their claim is their right as well as duty, constitutionally and on humanitarian grounds. Each Indian citizen is expected to respect his/her constitutional duties as much as he/she has the right and also the authority to secure the rights guaranteed by the Indian Constitution.

The decision taken and the inclination voiced about approaching the Supreme Court by the concerned parties must be hailed for two major reasons. One is the display of their awareness of their constitutional rights as Indian citizens. Equally significant to this is their decision of not taking law in their own hands. Irrespective of whether the second factor is based on their desired choice and/or has been deliberately taken under some pressure, its importance cannot be sidelined. This is because it clearly indicates that for some reason or other, these groups or people are not inclined towards taking law in their own hands.

With regard the Ayodhya-issue, this development must be compared with what happened 18 years ago. Demolition of the mosque on December 6, 1992 by lakhs of individuals amounted to taking law in their own hands. Despite the fact that legal cases were also being pursued then by several persons and groups, the day when lakhs demolished the mosque and incited communal frenzy across the nation remains a black chapter in India’s history:– legally, politically, socially. Why didn’t they wait then for the cases to be settled legally? What has made the same groups consider legal options now? Is there an uncanny linkage between their going for the demolition in 1992 and their opting for the judicial process now? Has their trust in the Indian judiciary suddenly increased? Why do they pretend to be law-abiding citizens now?

Eighteen years ago, there is little doubt that demolition of the mosque was a part of political game planned by the saffron brigade and their associates. The hype raised about constructing a temple after demolishing the mosque was a part of this political game. Undeniably, the saffron brigade succeeded to a degree politically with this frenzy helping their (political) wings gain prominence. What cannot be missed is that even the political “house” raised by exciting communal frenzy over demolition of the mosque was like that of cards. What else could it be like, with it having been raised only by misguiding the masses about their intentions? Yes, to a degree, some sections believed them then. But that was also the phase when communication revolution had not empowered the country’s citizens to see through the game-plans of leaders in the political race exploiting their religious sentiments. And as soon as the Indian citizens became aware of their religious sentiments being exploited, the house of cards simply crumbled. What else is suggested by the failure of saffron brigade to form the central government on its own political strength and its decision to put its so-called religious agenda on the backburner to secure support of “secular” allies? The same is more emphatically asserted by the failure of this group to return to power after a term.

Not surprisingly, political motives have now prompted quite a few “communal” leaders of yesterday to start giving emphasis to their “secular” agenda today. But this is one side of their stand towards Ayodhya-issue then and now. Religious hype was raised over Ayodhya leading to demolition of Babri Masjid primarily for political gains. They took law in their own hands, for which all have yet to face punishment, to turn the political tide in their favor. Politically, they are certainly wiser now. Besides, they have watched their own house of cards collapse at the national level. It has taken them sometime to understand the secular spirit of an average Indian. When they misunderstood it they exploited communal means for their political ends. Now, they face the risk of losing the political ground they have by turning communal again over Ayodhya-issue. So they are planning legal options. Politically, socially and judicially, they can no longer afford to take law in their own hands.

Besides, with JUH having approached the apex court, a crucial legal battle has begun. It may be noted, Babri Masjid is one of the places, planned to be targeted by those associated with saffron brigade. It is to be watched whether this case drags on endlessly, the importance given to illegal activities carried on at the site, after 15 August 1947- when Babri Masjid stood and after its demolition. 

This article appeared in The Milli Gazette print issue of 1-15 December 2010 on page no. 14

We hope you liked this report/article. The Milli Gazette is a free and independent readers-supported media organisation. To support it, please contribute generously. Click here or email us at

blog comments powered by Disqus