Ayodhya: Let Rule of Law Prevail

Sep 30, 2010 was a special day for India. From the morning itself, anticipation and a bit of anxiety was in the air. As people moved about their daily lives more or less normally, the question spontaneously popped up when people met together was this, “What would be the outcome of Ayodhya verdict today?”. Yes, the nation awaited the decision of the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad Highcourt with bated breath.

Ayodhya was a political and religious hotspot for centuries. Ever since Babar, the first Mughal emperor destroyed the temple of Ramjanmasthan at Ayodhya and constructed a mosque there in 1528, the location was coveted by both parties. Regular Hindu worship started in 1949 as the building was virtually left vacant by the Muslims, without any form of Islamic worship. Ayodhya assumed ominous proportions in the 80s when the then Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi allowed the laying of stone (shilanyas) for a new temple there. Communal passions ignited both parties to take a hostile view of each other. Massive construction movements spearheaded by the Hindu organisations succeeded in 1992 to tear down the disputed structure and erect a make-shift temple. Large scale communal violence erupted at several places in North India in the wake of the demolition, laying waste the lives of hundreds of innocent people of both religions.

The government led by Prime Minister Narasimha Rao awoke with a start from the complacent slumber and took stern action. It dissolved the Uttar Pradesh assembly led by the BJP and banned its sister outfit, the RSS. The onus of deciding on the fate of title suits of the disputed site came on the shoulders of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad Highcourt. After decades of legal ramblings, the court came out with the final verdict today.

The Bench, consisting of Justices Sibghat Ullah Khan, Sudhir Agarwal and Dharam Veer Sharma ruled on their majority verdict the following points.

1. The portion under the central dome of the disputed structure is indeed the birth place of Lord Ram (Ramjanmabhoomi).
2. The disputed structure was built by Babar after demolishing a massive Hindu religious structure as attested by the Archeological Survey of India. Since the destruction of a religious place of worship violates the tenets of Islam, it was not a mosque.
3. The disputed site should be split into 3 parts, the part where the idols of Ram are located is to be given to a trust for the upkeep of Ram temple. One part is to be given to Sunni Wakf Board and the third part should go to Nirmohi Akhara.
4. The Sunni Wakf Board’s plea for upholding title on land was dismissed.

Well, the legal battle is over and the judgement is out. It is clear that the verdict doesn’t please both sides. This itself is an indication of the impartiality of the judges. The Hindu Maha Sabha declared that they are not happy with the decision and the Sunni Wakf Board said they were disappointed with it. Perhaps, this may be the ideal outcome a secular country can hope for! Neither party came out as the sole victor. We should not dwell too much on the past and the court simply couldn’t have put the clock back by ordering a reconstruction of the disputed structure. India should start from here and make the court’s order a shining piece of adoration in its onward march towards the goals of harmony and brotherhood.