The political history of the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid conflict is of recent vintage. However, the legal cases go back to 1885.
What are the key issues involved in the consolidated Ayodhya title suits to be decided by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court on September 24? How are the political movements built around the dispute different from the civil suits, the earliest of which dates back to 1885?
While there is much folklore around centuries-long battles fought over the Ramjanmabhoomi and the Babri Masjid, the dispute's violent political history culminating in the destruction of the Babri Masjid is of very recent vintage. On December 6, 1992, the Masjid was brutally brought down by Ram kar sevaks in the presence of a stellar cast of Bharatiya Janata Party leaders, among whom was Lal Krishna Advani.
The Ram temple movement was launched by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad in 1982; the BJP officially adopted the issue in June 1989 with a resolution passed at its national executive in Palampur, Himachal Pradesh: “The BJP holds that the nature of this controversy is such that it just cannot be sorted out by a court of law. A court of law … cannot adjudicate as to whether Babar did actually invade Ayodhya, destroy a temple and build a mosque in its place … The sentiments of the people must be respected, and Ramjanmasthan handed over to the Hindus — if possible through a negotiated settlement, or else, by legislation. Litigation certainly is no answer.”
Two major twists
However, two major twists in the story came courtesy the Rajiv Gandhi government. Acting with alacrity on a February 1, 1986 decision of the Faizabad District Judge, it ordered open the locks of the Masjid, thus paving the way for the politicisation of the movement. The unlocked doors were a huge symbolic victory for the VHP which ramped up its agitation with the Muslim side retaliating by forming the All-India Babri Masjid Action Committee. On November 9, 1989, with only days to go for the Lok Sabha election, the Rajiv Gandhi government allowed the VHP to perform the shilanyas (foundation laying ceremony) of the temple, thus implicitly accepting that the sangh parivar was within its rights to build a temple on the disputed site.
For the sangh parivar and the BJP, there was no looking back after this. Starting 1989, the movement steadily gathered pace, growing in size and violence even as the BJP formally came into the picture. The agitation scaled two major peaks: Mr. Advani's Ram rath yatra of 1990 and the December 6, 1992 demolition of the Masjid. Through all this, the sangh's position remained steadfast: since Ram's birth was a matter of faith, Hindus must be given possession of the land, either by negotiations with Muslims or by legislation enacted in Parliament.
The legal history of the dispute (source: Babri Masjid, A.G. Noorani) shows that other Hindu organisations, themselves deeply divided, had no reservations about fighting out the case in court. In fact, Bhagwan Rama Virajman (presiding deity Bhagwan Ram) was himself listed as a party in one of the suits filed in the Court of the Civil Judge, Faizabad (case no 236 of 1989). Arrayed against the Lord in this case (now part of the consolidated suit and registered as original suit number 5 of 1989 in the High Court) are Hindu as well as Muslim defendants, among them Rajendra Singh, son of the original plaintiff, Gopal Singh Visharad; Mahant Paramahans Ramachandra Das, regarded as the mascot of the temple movement; Nirmohi Akhara, one of Ayodhya's oldest religious institutions; and the Sunni Central Board of Wakfs, the main litigant from the Muslim side.
The dispute was dragged to the court for the first time in 1885, when Mahant Raghubar Das filed suit no 61/280 of 1885 in the Court of the Sub-Judge, Faizabad, against the Secretary of State for India, seeking permission to construct a temple on the Ram chabutra (adjoining the Babri structure). The stage for the next batch of litigation was set on December 23, 1949, when a mob of 50-60 people laid siege to the mosque and surreptitiously placed the idols of Ram and other objects right under the central dome. This led to the property going into the hands of the receiver, and to puja being conducted by a pujari appointed by the receiver.
On January 16, 1950, Gopal Singh Visharad filed a suit in the Faizabad civil court (suit no 2 of 1950 now registered as other Original Suit no 1 of 1989 in the High Court) seeking exclusive rights for performing puja for Ram Lalla. He sought a restraint order on the removal of idols on which the judge issued a temporary injunction. This order was later confirmed by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
On December 5, 1950, Mahant Paramahansa Ramachandra Das (now dead) filed a suit (no 25 of 1950 now registered as other Original Suit no 2 in the High Court) for the continuation of puja and keeping the idols in the Babri structure. In August 1990, out of sheer frustration, the Mahant withdrew the case.
The third suit (no 26 of 1959, now registered as other Original Suit no 3 of 1989 in the High Court) was filed on December 17, 1959 by the Nirmohi Akhara seeking transfer of charge of the disputed site from the receiver. The fourth suit (no 12 of 1961 now registered as other Original suit no 4 of 1989 in the High Court) was filed on December 18, 1961 by the U.P. Sunni Central Board of Wakfs for the declaration and possession of the Babri site. Significantly, this suit was filed with days to go before the expiry of the 12-year limitation period. The fifth suit, in the name of Bhagwan Ram Lalla Virajman, was filed after a gap of 28 years on July 1, 1989. While the first four suits were filed during periods of relative political calm, the fifth suit coincided with the escalation in the political movement. Only a month earlier, the BJP had officially joined the movement.
With suit No 2 withdrawn, only four title suits remained in the Faizabad civil court. In 1989, on an application by the then Advocate General of U.P., these suits were transferred to the High Court. On October 10, 1991, the Kalyan Singh government acquired 2.77 acres of land around the disputed dacha. After the demolition, the Narasimha Rao government at the Centre, with the consent of Parliament, took over some 67 acres of land all around the disputed area and sought a Presidential reference to the Supreme Court to find out whether a Hindu place of worship predated the construction of the Masjid. The Supreme Court declined to answer the reference.
Muslims claimed in their suit that the shrine had always remained a mosque and prayers were being offered there up until 1949, when the gates were locked following the illegal installation of idols. They sought a declaration that the area in dispute be declared a Babri Mosque.
On the other hand, on behalf of Hindus it was argued that the right to worship the deity of Ram Lalla at the disputed site in Ayodhya must be recognised by the court, as millions of Hindus believed it to be the birthplace of Lord Ram. Further that in Hindu ethos and Hindu customary law, unlike in other religions, the concept of deity was a very distinguishing feature. The Hindu side quoted the Valmiki Ramayana, the Skanda Puran, the Gita as also a whole range of other literary and cultural evidence to claim that Ram was born in Ayodhya. It cited many accounts by foreign travellers of the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th Century besides a series of Gazetteers to argue that not only before 1528 but even thereafter Hindus held possession of the place.
Main issues
The following are the main issues (not all) framed by the Court to decide the dispute.
— Whether the building had been constructed on the site of an alleged Hindu temple after demolishing the same. If so, its effect?
— Whether the building in question described as a mosque was a mosque as claimed by the plaintiffs.
— Whether the building stood dedicated to almighty God as alleged by the plaintiffs.
— Whether the building had been used by members of the Muslim community for offering prayers from times immemorial.
— Whether the idols and objects of worship were placed inside … or were in existence even earlier.
— Have the Hindus been worshipping the place in dispute as Sri Ramjanmabhoomi and visiting it as a sacred place of pilgrimage as (a matter) of right since times immemorial?
Keywords: Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid, Ayodhya title suits
I think the Ayodhya verdict has been very fair...the court has allowed temple and mosque to co-exist, in the spirit of our Indian ethos of co-existence and tolerance.
Politicians are playing a game at which they are experts. Janta should understand this and react accordingly. If Public at large say we not bothered if it is Temple or Mosque I believe both Politicians and Media will lose their interest. In that case it will be easy for the judiciary to take an unbiased decision.
sahir
Per your law, the mandir has been for more than 12 years. so it should now be a mandir
If faith is going to be decided by courts based on evidence admissible as per the Indian evidence Act, COME ON letus decide all issues regarding faith with regard to Christians and muslims as well in the like manner. Hope the court will adjudicate on the birth crusifiction and resurrection of christ, origin of Koran as well and a binding legal precedent will be laid for the country to adopt.
Its shocking revelation that the Supreme Court was unable to provide an Advisory Opinion when asked whether a Hindu place of worship predated the Historic Babri Masjid. My suggestion, seek the assistance of the United Nations, assemble an International team of archaeologists armed with the latest equipment of carbon dating and other important tools and devices to figure out this primarily archaeological question of dispute. The Judiciary in India from the Faziabad District Court to the Supreme Court have demonstrated through time that they are utterly incapable of pronouncing upon such a judgement.
even if there stood a mandir before the mosque, according to the law of adverse possession, a property becomes adversely possessed and the title over it gets perfected after a period of 12 years. so, even if we assume that mosque was constructed over a temple in 1528, the title over the suit property got perfected over the 400 odd years! this is strictly according to the laws of India.
After reading the article (finally some history on the subject, so thanks The Hindu) and the comments, I agree with those who suggested to neutralize the sacred ground.....convert it into a happy place where people can come and get away from their stresses of life...a nature garden or somthing. However, my muslim brothers and sisters should realize how hurtful it is when someone comes and tramples ones site of worship.....irrespective, temple or mosque. History can not be changed, but a better peaceful future can certainly be built....all it takes is for one side to admit "...sad atrocities did happen a long time ago though, sorry" ....and for the other side to say "yes, that was a long time ago...let's forget, forgive and move on brother". But the politicians won't let that happen...unki roji-roti jo bandh ho jayegi :) In the meantime I wonder what Ramji, himself such a symbol of peace, is thinking about all the argument and bloodshed!
It is really sad that a so called secular country like India has wasted so many resources on an issue like this. Many innocent people lost their lives because of this matter. Instead of giving justice to them, the focus is more on a piece of land. The best decision would be to just build a memorial there in the memory of people who lost there lives...and a beautiful garden for children of all communities to play there together. Whether Babar destroyed a temple ,whether there was a temple, whether Sri Ram was really born there.. all this can never be proved. If we are talking of respecting religious sentiments then both Hindu and Muslims have to be given justice. As of today there is no person alive who might have seen a Ram Mandir there...but there are certainly people alive who must have offered their prayers at Babri Masjid.It depends whose sentiments are important - people who are dead or people who are alive. India was deprived of one of its great Historical monuments when Babri Masjid was brought down. We have had so many years of hatred for "Nothing" .Let's end this horror as soon as we can.
We suffer from Poverty, Hunger, Disease, Flood, Corruption, improper sanitation, Lack of basic Infrastructures and many more such basic problems but our politicians and their followers still find time to waste their effort on a petty issue like building a temple or a Masjid or to call for bharath bandh etc.
Can't we direct our efforts to eradicate any of these??
How many times did BJP took a strong stand against corruption?? When will the party in power act against those who fail to deliver their duties?? When will we hang Kasab??
Congress is waiting for attention to be diverted from the corruptions of commonwealth games to something else. BJP wants something on their agenda to fight the next election. Definitely they wont shout against corruption as they themselves are not clean.
Lets make a cricket stadium in the disputed place and the funds generated by it should be given to some orphanage obviously after organisers book their profit. Both sides will be happy.
Lets move from this topic. We say we are Economic power, world leaders but we still cannot come out of the cloak of the Third world country.
Where are the leaders who think of India first???
We have full faith in our judiciary, but one thing is clear. When the verdict of title suits relating to the Ayodhya dispute is announced, at least one party's sentiments would be hurt. So they will surely approach the Supreme Court . As of July 2010 , 53000 cases are pending with the Supreme Court. Why can't the Supreme Court first resolves those pending issues which are much more important then this. I don't think anyone in this country really wants any verdict on the Ayodhya dispute, not even the people who fight for it .
I some how feel that in the name of secularism we kill the spirit of truth. If there was a temple earlier and due envasion of Babar it was demolished why not to hand over the site to Hindus for rituals. Simply speaking of taking the dosage of pseudo seculkarism which only favours one religion and teaching other religion people about peace all these years is shear trying to supress an issue for short period of time. Today's generation that truely have no time for religion, culture , faith in god and are just after money can talk of human values so that they dont want any kind of terbulance in their flow of making money. The Issue should be put full stop to by sentencing a VARDICT. Let it be in favour of anybody.
One side will happy with the verdict and celebrate which may infuriate the other side. Always there is a provision for appeal. Now at the height of communal riots, it is advisable that public are counselled and State and Central Govt. take steps to maintain peace. One thing is certain, there can be a consensual decision for the dispute and not any orders.
the present political leadership in the country and especially in the congress,is manifestly incompetent and incapable of dealing with this issue self opininated liliputs will not be able to fill in the big boot of history
Ramjanma bhoomi is the sacred palce of Hindus. It is the birth place of Lord Rama who is the ideal to every hindu in the world. May masjid appears there but previously it is Hindus sacred place. We want Hindustan as it as before the other invasions happened.
What I don't understand is whether it really matters if the temple was there before mosque? All this is just political drama with which politicians have been gathering votes. Why don't people try to solve real issues prevalent in the country? Always the poor or low income workers are the ones participating in these violence acts, because they are easily swayed by the leaders. Does any educated person will really bother about all this. It's high time people should leave old prejudices and conflicts.
We ought to most certainly accept the verdict. Of course the losing party will appeal to the Supreme Court but eventually we'll have a resolution. Why can't we just build a mosque and a temple next to each other and satisfy both parties? I completely agree with other commentators that we must strive to prevent anti-national elements, especially from across the border, from breaking the nation's solidarity by causing severe agitation. They are already doing that in Kashmir.
Hey Ram!! These words were uttered by the most Secular of us all. He did not side with Ram because of his religion. “Ram Raj” which he explained and meant as “the rule based on moral authority”. In spite of his explanation that by “Ram Raj” he did not mean Hindu Raj but “The kingdom of God”, the God of truth and righteousness, , it never failed to arouse the fear of orthodox Muslims that Gandhi meant to establish a Hindu Raj. Perhaps, for a man so thoroughly steeped in Hindu philosophy, a different vocabulary was not possible.
The Gita States that the biggest service we do is not to the lord but to his disciple.
It is time for us to build a statute of for the disciple. We have built many for him but this should be on a scale which no one has ever seen before. The world should be awed by the scale of the statue. Any person visiting the place should be forced to forget the ills which the place had caused by the sheer size of the creation. I am sure the Supreme Being as well as we lowly mortals will find peace in the same.
To say that there is only one god and all faiths lead to the same god is mere nonsense, in my view. There are as many gods as there are human beings. There are gods propitiated with sweets, with fish and toddy, with wine and bread etc, etc. Some people believe that theirs is the only god and those who do not bow to him are infidels, while others are there who can take in any number of visualisations. And there have been cases where a non-believer sustains a head injury and after recovery becomes a preacher! The great Adi Sankara enabled his dying mother 'see' Mahavishnu and Mahadev by invocations.
Faith is okay but trying to convert people to one's own faith is clear proof that faith as such has no real merit and is just a platform for organised activity.
The issue of faith which is the identity of Indian is more important than issues like poverty, health, education etc. Hence as a matter of fact the Muslims should volunteer to give up their claim in return that there will be no further demand for conversion of mosques to temples in other places. I would like to advise my muslim friends who write that india's progress is more important than this piece of land to similarly accept that kashmir is part of india and the muslims there are advised to accept Indian rule for the progress of India.
The series of events involved are the next generations history text book lesson. Generations to come will learn how to distance themselves from the fundamentalist who has insufficient mental faculties to foster a good society. The educated political class Hindu fundamentalist who has so irresponsibly instigated the wrong sentiments in the majority leading to a complete alienation of the minority causing much xenophobia and insecurity, so much so that the very existence is threatened and thereby pushing the fringe elements over the edge in to revengeful terrorism. These political elite class of hindu fundamentalists will be remembered as the fathers of terrorism and villains of Indian history for centuries to come.
A hungry person can see the god in his food, not in temple nor in Masjid. I have not seen any Ram or Allah.
whatever writen by Mr karanjot singh i am appreciating his view.
The judgment must be satisfy both sides and it should be in such a way that it will increase the unity between two community people and country. It should not become a chance to other (neighboring country and terrorist) for creating riots in India.
What a waste of resource. If we believe in GOD, then there is only ONE. Why do you worry who it is? If we don't believe in GOD no problem. Spend the resources for bringing a few more people above poverty line.
it is said part of our indian history that people are fight for temple and mosque while our country is faces another various problems but people still intriguing in trifle matter.let us join to move india forward irrespective of cast,creed and religious.
Everyone is eagarly awaiting the Babri Masjid verdict...Let the justice do their work...ofcourse we people won't have right to tell the Government to built this or that...We know that what it was..but know what it is...It is the Hand of Almighty to decide and we should obey the Government order...
Verdict of the court need to be respected. We indians are brothers and sisters and let us choose the path of love over path of violence. If possible, let both mosque and Ram temple exist there. There should not be a problem. Let us co exist peacefully and respect each other's sentiments.
Incident like this brings untrust towards our nation and the officials. First leaders should look into the people's life who deprived of basic necessities of life. As a citizan, I am ashamed of the people in our nation who do not have the care and concern for the people rather buildings. We need not the God of any religion in our nation. I don't think any god wants our blood rather than the love between us.
we are living in 21st century.what may be the verdict of court,there is need to construct college building or playground at the disputed territory,so that people from both communties read, play respectively together for strengthening communal hormony of our nation.
I would not say I have deeply understood the history of the disputed sight. Logically speaking both Hindus & Muslims should not make this as point of conflict. Instead a common edifice which represents humanism and tolerance should be constructed at the sight.
Why India only?? In my opinion steps should be taken for the world to be made a better place for living....which encourage the unification of all living person(as it is separated by so called different religious communities in the world).There has been already wastage of enormous amount of money and other resources in this ongoing verdict(may be continued later also).I think a better alternative would be to make a hospital or school or orphanage or some business organization which generate employment or........the list goes on.I am just a student and citizen of India if I am able to thin this much then I do hope many more are more educated and far sighted then me both in knowledge and experience as well .
With an academic approach on this article, whilst empathizing with the comments so far, isn't it part of the solution to learn more of the site and clear the cobwebs and beliefs of people. Then consider the facts backed by an archeological study. This may prove inconclusive but will go down as a genuine effort to resolve the issue.
This is the first full fledged account of the issue I have gone through, and it seems a very important issue and a very lame one at the same time. The verdict, if in favour of the Hindus/Muslims, is definitely going to hurt the religious stability that has been established after so many years of effort. I am now very interested in the so-called secular judgment that the Indian court is going to enforce on this issue.
But I think that in this particular case, I'd be much happy if there is no verdict at all. We are all humans at the end of the day, aren't we?
living in peace is always the biggest the nature has given us , if people fighting on those issue which could affect our peaceful life ,lets fight for peace as our right and try to turn this hype into other important ones.
Its pity that sacred books like Skanda Puraan, Ramayan, Srimad Bhagwad-Geeta are being needed to present in court as 'evidence' to prove a crystal-clear case.
History has been nasty for both the side, politician will play with Ram and Baber as this is their trump card for vote bank but there should be a solution for this problem so that both side faiths are restored.The problem can be solved by building a national monument where both side can worship under one umbrella.
It is deeply concerning that the time , energy and resources of our country have been directed at an issue like this.Alas! There are millions of people deprived of basic necessities of life in our nation , but still the place of worship seems to be of egoistical importance than working on creating a better life for people.Very sad!
The debate on Ram janmabhoomi is going on for decades,which was further triggered by votebank politics. We do not want another Jerusalem , and let India be what it is -- amalgamation of different faiths.
The Babri Masjid verdict will decide the credibility of the Indian State and its justice system. Every one should accept it. Those who refuse to accept it should be dealt with under contempt of court. Let justice prevail.
The world would be a better place to live in if there is peace among people of different faiths. Every attempt should be me made to reinforce the bond of humanity, the will to encourage the good and abstinence from wrongdoing. Our progress, our country's progress depends on how strong this cultural fabric is and let no organisation try to play mischief.
The report artfully doges the archaeological evidence for the presence of the temple at the site and an inscription testifying to it
Please Email the Editor