|
MARCH OF AYODHYA
New twists and turnsMalladi Rama Rao
bjectively speaking ,
the Ayodhya dispute
has two aspects. One
relates to a tiny spec
of 2.77 acres (1.12
ha) in Down Town
Ayodhya on the banks of Saryu River.
It dates back to 1885, the year
Mahant Raghubar Das sought
permission of the British authorities
to build a Ram temple on the land
adjoining the Babri Mosque that had
been built after pulling down a
temple to mark Babur's triumphant
march into India from the battle
fields of Panipat in 1525. Built by Mir
Baqi, one of Babur's generals, it came
up over the remains of a 10th
century temple, according to a
report of the Archaeological Survey of India, (ASI), submitted to the
Allahabad high court.
Lal Krishna Advani, Uma Bharti and Murali Manohar Joshi
The second aspect relates to
demolition of the 'structure' at the
disputed site in 1992; it involves
conspiracy theories besides the allimportant
question- whether Lord
Ram was actually born at the place
considered by the faithful today as
his birth place. Consequences
Kapil Sibal
For this ruling, the apex court
invoked Article 142, like it did in
many recent cases - 2G scam, coal
mine allocation mess, liquor sales along highways- in its desire to
make wheels of justice to move.
Ram to Rajiv's rescue
VP Singh and Rajiv Gandhi
As a journalist working with All India Radio, I covered
various aspects of Ayodhya imbroglio
–Chandrasekhar–led negotiations,
VHP campaign ("garv se kaho hum
Hindu hain" -say it with pride, we are
Hindu), Advani Rath Yatra, kar sevaks'
march to Ayodhya, and so on.
Rohinton F. Nariman and
P.C. Ghose
PV Narasimha Rao too played
around the Ram temple issue.
His acolytes claim that the wily
Telugu bidda (son) had deprived the
BJP of its emotive issue through
masterly inaction on the fateful day. Two benchesBut it is not germane to the retrial
that has been ordered by the Apex
Court.Nor is the question why two
different aspects of the same issue
landed up before two different
benches to end up in two different
way outs. But it is not germane to the retrial that has been ordered by the Apex Court.Nor is the question why two different aspects of the same issue landed up before two different benches to end up in two different way outs. The Bench of Justices P.C. Ghose and Rohinton F. Nariman has agreed with the CBI that the actual demolition case and the speeches made by BJP top brass(from the dais at Ramkatha Kunj prior to the razing of the 16th century Masjid) are pari materia or part of the same action. Lalu dig at ModiLalu Prasad Yadav Luck rarely favours the CBI. A case in point is the Jain hawala scandal of 1991 that placed Advani, Shiv Shankar, Sharad Yadav, Balram Jakhar, and Madan Lal Khurana among others in the dock. The prosecution failed to prove its conspiracy theory and the case collapsed by 1998.So much so whichever government is in power on the Raisina Hill, the CBI finds itself hailed as the "Caged Parrot". Lalu Prasad Yadav, the RJD
chief, referred to this CBI flips side
when he targeted Prime Minister
Narendra Modi after the Supreme
Court's verdict in Babri Demolition
case. He linked the CBI's advocacy of the case against Advani with the
forthcoming Presidential election
in July 2017. Conspiracy theoriesIn these days of Kejriwaleperfected
shoot and scoot
politics, logic and reason have no
place.
GVG Krishna Murthy
F o r m e r
E l e c t i o n
Commissioner,
GVG Krishna
Murthy, has an
interesting take
on Delhi. "The
city has not
grown beyond its
H a s t i n a p u r a
moorings; it
remains still the
grand old
kutraprastha",
he told me once.
He should know because he has been
a long-time resident of the national
capital. CJI–SPEAKJ S Verma "…. It is in the national interest that there is no loser at the end of the process adopted for resolution of the dispute so that the final outcome does not leave behind any rancour in anyone. This can be achieved by a negotiated solution …," Justice J S Verna said in 1994 as the CJI in a case related to the constitutional validity of the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993 and the maintainability of the Special Reference made by the President.
D.Y. Chandrachud and Sanjay
Kishan Kaul
Roughly 3 years later in March
2017 the Supreme Court
echoed the same views. Chief Justice
of India, CJI, R. S. Khehar, said. "If the
parties want me (CJI) to sit with
mediators chosen by both the sides
for negotiations, I am ready."
Hearing the title dispute appeals
along with Justices D.Y. Chandrachud
and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, he also
offered to spare any other judge of
the court if required. Middle groundProbably left to themselves, the residents of Ayodhya could have had no problem in finding a middle ground, with no concern for conspiracy theories – present and past and the very distant past. But going by the latest turn of events, the title suit appears set to linger on for long. The judiciary's advice for negotiated settlement has met with a firm no by the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB). "No out-of-court settlement is
acceptable to us," the Board said in a
resolution adopted at the end of a
two-day meeting in Lucknow on the
16th April. "On the Babri Masjid
issue, the board would only accept a
decision by the Supreme Court", it
said. No fast tracking
J S Khehar and Subramanian
Swamy
The Supreme Court, on its part,
is unlikely to fast-forward the
Ayodhya dispute.
"We don't have the time right
now", Chief Justice of India (CJI) J S
Khehar told Subramanian Swamy
curtly on March 31, and declined to
fix a date to hear the case that has been making rounds of various
courts for some 68-years. Future imperfectSecularism cherished in India, is not atheism. It is respect to all religious practices- ancient and modern alike. Indian secularism does not see the country's rich cultural and religious diversity through a borrowed prism, even if it is the much fancied Saudi variety. Nor does it have a place for mobocracy. It is this reality check that makes Indian future imperfect till the time we learn to live as one nation, one people willing to sit across the table to come to grips with the challenges of the day through talks and more talks with the image of argumentative Indian dumped in the glaciers high on the Himalayas.
|