ayodhya is supposed be without warrior. but it has thrown op many warriors. the war is continuing. today is supposed be another milestone day in the time line of Ayodhya. 60 years ago fight for the ownership of the piece of land in Ayodhya started. at that time there was a mosque. an idol of Rama appeared and Hindus started worshiping. there was an ongoing case over a a platform in front of the mosque for many years. it has to be seen in historical perspective. it was known that the mosque was made by one of the commander of Babur. it is well known that Muslim invaders destroyed many temples and in many place they erected mosques. it was put forth that even the temple at the birthplace of Rama was destroyed and mosque was built on that.
this made the discussion broader. till then only the platform was in question but after this whole of the land was brought under discussion. along with revenue details, historical question were asked. archeology was brought in the debate. historian, academicians, politician and religious heads took sides. after about 40 years, came 1992 when the mosque was brought down to make a temple at that place. at present a temporary mandir is at that place.
there are overalls question being asked
was there a temple before mosque was brought down?
does that land belong to Hindu or Muslim plaintiff?
there are many people claiming the right over ownership. there are many ideas with the land. from mandir and mosque to hospital, sports complex, shopping mall orphanage and even a urinal. that shows how Bharat can think beyond horizon. there is group who has kept all the materials ready for the mandir. there are political parties who are ready to rebuild the mosque.
one more day and the ball will set rolling. everyone is having his opinion. some clear some not so. some want to player and some spectator. but everybody is interested. there has been many attempts for compromise but it has failed.
the ball wil set rolling with the words of the judge.
people are speculation about out come. will it favour Hindus or Muslims.
we know how revenue details can be forged and how historical and archeological facts can be twisted to fit the theory. anyway i am not even aware of the fact which have been presented. judge is going to deliver a judgment which has been in making for last many years. he is at very important time at the history of Bharat.
according to me it could be like this
"There was a temple previous to the mosque as shown by the archeological evidences, which is in favor of Hindus. But revenue details are in favour of Muslims."
it would be very logical since before British Muslims ruled Ayodhya and it would be logical that land might have been with some Muslim owner
this will shift the ball back in the court of people. Judge will shake off his responsibility. He will choose not to interfere with the natural justice which should have been out through the political class and the mature society by now. It seems when the Idol appeared in the mosque, Nehru, then PM of India to the magistrate of the place to remove it or block devotees from praying. he told that he would prefer to give up his job rather interfere in the process. he had a conscience and he heard that voice. like that every one is listening to their voices.
we will wait for just one more day what the man of the day had to say.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
The case time line ( taken from The Hindu, New Delhi, Sept 29th 2010)
Idols of Rama Lalla were placed surreptitiously in the middle of the floor space under the central dome on December 23, 1949. Soon thereafter, devotees assembled there to worship. On December 29, 1949, the city magistrate exercised control over the whole area.
The first suit was filed on January 16, 1950 by Gopal Simla Visharad in the Faizabad civil court for exclusive rights to perform pooja to Ram Lalla. He sought a restraint order on removal of the idols and a temporary injunction was issued. This order was later confirmed by the civil judge and later by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court.
On December 5, 1950, Paramahansa Ramachandra Das also filed a suit for continuation of the pooja and keeping the idols in the Babri structure. This was pending till August 1990, when out of sheer frustration he withdrew the case.
The third suit was filed in 1959 by the Nirmohi Akhara, seeking a direction to hand over charge of the disputed site from the receiver. The fourth suit was filed in 1961 by the U.P. Sunni Central Wakf Board for a declaration and possession. The fifth suit was filed on July 1, 1989 in the name of Bhagwan Shree Ram Lalla Virajman for a declaration and possession.
On February 1, 1986, a district judge ordered the locks on the mosque removed and the site was opened for Hindu worshippers. Two years earlier, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad had begun a campaign to “liberate” the so-called birthplace of Lord Rama, and the 1986 decision was widely seen at the time as an attempt by the Congress — then in power at the Centre and in U.P. — to upstage the VHP and the Bharatiya Janata Party.
In 1989, the four suits pending in the Faizabad civil court were transferred to the High Court on an application moved by the U.P. Advocate-General.
On October 10, 1991, the U.P. government acquired the 2.77-acre of land around the disputed structure for the convenience of devotees who attend Ram Lalla darshan. On January 7, 1993, the Government of India, with the consent of Parliament, took over some 67 acres of land all around the disputed area and sought the Supreme Court's opinion on whether there existed a Hindu place of worship before the disputed structure was built. But it declined to answer the question. On October 24, 1994, it turned the case back to the Lucknow Bench of the High Court and the suits were heard again from 1996.
Long legal history
In fact, the first suit was filed in 1885, when the Faizabad Deputy Commissioner refused to let Mahant Raghubar Das build a temple on land adjoining the mosque. Das then filed a title suit in a Faizabad court against the Secretary of State for India, seeking permission to build a temple on the Chabutra on the outer courtyard of the Babri Masjid.
His suit was dismissed on grounds that the alleged demolition of an original Ram temple in 1528 had occurred over 350 years earlier, and so it was “too late now” to remedy the grievance. “Maintain status quo. Any innovation may cause more harm than any benefit,” the court said. This suit was revived in 1950.
In August 2002, the High Court ordered a survey by the Archaeological Survey of India to find out whether a temple existed below the mosque or not.
Post a Comment