Ayodhya verdict | CPI (M) calls for expediting case on Babri Masjid demolition

Kar sevaks bring down the Babri Masjid in 1992. | File   | Photo Credit: AFP

The CPI(M) on Saturday demanded that the cases pertaining to the Babri Masjid demolition be expedited and those responsible punished, hours after the Supreme Court delivered its ruling in the Ayodhya dispute.

In a statement, the party’s Polit Bureau questioned the judgment. “The CPI(M) has always maintained that the issue should be resolved through a judicial verdict, if a negotiated settlement was not possible. While this judgment has provided a judicial resolution to this fractious issue, there are certain premises of the judgment which are questionable,” it said.

Party general secretary Sitaram Yechury said, “The judgment states that the demolition of the Babri Masjid was illegal. Then, what is the action against those who had orchestrated it? The judgment says the placing of the Ram Lala statue in 1949 was illegal. Then, are you going to punish those responsible for it?”


Now that the dispute was resolved legally, the cases pertaining to the Masjid demolition should be taken to their logical end. “The judgment has itself stated that the demolition of the Babri Masjid in December 1992 was a violation of law. This was a criminal act and an assault on the secular principle. The cases pertaining to the demolition should be expedited and the guilty punished,” the Polit Bureau said.

Mr. Yechury also pointed out that the court did not name those who authored the judgment. “We don’t know who is the author of this judgment.  They said one of these five judges wrote the addenda, but the name of the author is not mentioned. This is unprecedented,” he said.


The judgment, he said, should not be used for any action to disrupt communal harmony.

The Communist Party of India welcomed the judgment, but said it should not be seen as either a victory for or a defeat of any community. “While declaring that all faiths are equal, the court has delivered this reconciliatory judgment. This should be seen in the larger perspective of ethics, justice and secularism. This should not be seen as a victory to any party or litigant, and in the prevailing situation, nobody should resort to any provocation,” it said in a statement.

In a statement, the CPI (ML) Polit Bureau said, “The verdict has failed to provide a convincing resolution of the dispute and the incoherence between the premise and conclusion of the judgment makes it inconsistent and unconvincing.”

Our code of editorial values

Related Topics
This article is closed for comments.
Please Email the Editor

Printable version | Jun 9, 2021 4:07:17 AM |

Next Story