ABSTRACT:
The Ayodhya controversy in India, a political, historical, and socio religious conflict, revolves around a plot of land believed to be the birthplace of Hindu God Ram. People in India have a deep attachment to religious sentiments, which can lead to both positive and negative effects. Politicians use a “divide and rule” strategy to manipulate religious beliefs, causing societal friction and instability. The Ayodhya Dispute Case highlights the importance of understanding and analysing religious disputes.
INTRODUCTION:
The “Ayodhya Dispute Case” is a long-running dispute in India involving the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh. The dispute stems from the alteration of the temple, which was ruled by Muslims, and the discovery of a Ram idol by Muslim pilgrims in 1949. Both Hindus and Muslims claim ownership of the site, leading to a series of legal battles. The first religious conflict in Ayodhya occurred in 1850 when Hindus attacked the Babri Mosque. The Hindu community believes the land should be returned to them and a temple built on it. However, the colonial authority consistently denied its request. In 1949, the Hindu activists got into the mosque and set a camp inside the Rama and Sita idols. The police sealed the doors, preventing Hindus and Muslims from entering. Priests were granted permission to enter the mosque for daily prayer. The Sunni Waqf Board and the Akhil Bharatiya Ramayana Mahasabha (ABRM) filed a case in a local court to assert their rights in the religious property. The case had been heard by the court for over a decade before Nirmohi Akhara filed a complaint in 1959, claiming ownership of the land. The Sunni Central Waqf Council submitted a counter-request to the Sunni community in 1961, which was accepted.
Timeline:
1. The Babri mosque was destroyed by a mob of around 200,000 Karsevaks on December 6, 1992
2.After ten days it was demolished by the Center’s Congressional Authority which was led by PV Narasimha Rao, summoned an investigation team led by Judge Liberhan.
3. The case’s last hearing commenced on August 6, 2019 before the Supreme Court’s five-judge constitution bench, chaired by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi8.
4. The Supreme Court held its last hearing on October 16, 2019. The final judgement has been rescheduled. For three days, the Court allowed parties to make written comments on the “remedy shape” or the concerns that the court needed to address.
5. The final decision was handed out on November 9, 2019. “The Supreme Court said that the property must be transferred to a trust for the expressive purpose of constructing the Ram Temple. Additionally, the government granted the Sunni Waqf Council 5 acres of land within the municipal boundaries of Ayodhya for the construction of a mosque.”
6. On December 12, 2019, the Supreme Court refused all applications for reconsideration of the verdict.
Case Analysis:
The Allahabad High Court has issued a decision in the land dispute between Hindus, Muslims, and Nirmohi Akhara over the ownership of disputed land in Ayodhya. The Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu group, claimed to have retained the facility, which was used as a temple until December 1949. The dispute revolves around land ownership and the history of the Babri Mosque. The Supreme Court adjourned hearings on the matter and postponed the decision until November 2019.
The court granted the Ram Janmabhoomi Foundation ownership of the controversial 2,77-acre property in Ayodhya, with the Muslim parties instructed to construct a mosque in an “appropriate” and “prominent” location on a different piece of property in Ayodhya. The court also ordered the government to create a plan and build a temple at Ayodhya within three months.
Various interested parties have submitted written declarations, with the court stating that no part of the contested zone should be granted to the “Nirmohi Akhara or Muslim parties.” The Sunni Waqf Council, a Hindu assembly, is expected to follow the same strategy advocated throughout the hearings. The Supreme Court is expected to establish a trust to oversee the construction of a Ram temple on the disputed site in Ayodhya, with a trustee appointed to oversee its administration.
During the relief petition filed before the Allahabad High Court, the Muslim parties claimed that the disputed land had been abandoned and given to the Hindu party so that the Ram temple could be built. The land given by the High Court to the Sunni Waqf Council should now be granted to the Hindu parties.
Obiter dicta:
The Supreme Court resolved a sacred site dispute between Hindus and Muslims, awarding the Ram god unique legal personality and allowing Hindus access to the contested site. The Sunni Waqf Board supported Muslim interests, and the court found that Hindus remained in the outer courtyard since 1857, while the interior courtyard was contested. The court ruled that granting religious icons independent legal status shielded property from misappropriation, but rejected granting legal personality to immovable property like a holy site. The court also acknowledged the inferential nature of archaeological findings and the uncertainty of historical documents. The court granted Hindus exclusive custody of the outer courtyard, but the courtyard inside was contested. The court ordered the Central Government to establish a trust to oversee the property, including the construction of a Ram temple. The Supreme Court ordered the federal and state governments to award the Sunni Central Waqf Board 5 acres in Ayodhya for a mosque.
Judgement:
From August through October 2019, a Supreme Court bench of five judges hear cases on the title. The Supreme Court, chaired by J. Ranjan Gogoi, declared on November 9, 2019, that the land belonged to the government based on tax records.18 He also directed the government to build the mosque and to provide the Waqf Sunni Council an additional 5 acres of land.
The top ten points emphasised in the verdict in this case are as follows:
• The Supreme Court has granted God Ram Lalla ownership of the entire 2,77-acre disputed land in Ayodhya.
• The Supreme Court has ordered the central and Uttar Pradesh governments to provide the Muslims with 5 acres of alternative land for the construction of a famous mosque.
• The court asked the Center to consider providing Nirmohi Akhara some type of representation in the establishing of a trust. The third party in the Ayodhya debate was Nirmohi Akhara.
• The Supreme Court dismissed Nirmohi Akhara’s appeal, in which the organisation claimed to be the caretaker of all contested areas.
• The Supreme Court directed the Union government to establish a trust within three months to construct the Ram Mandir on the disputed site of the Babri Masjid’s 1992 demolition.
• The Supreme Court determined that the structure beneath the Ayodhya site in question did not constitute an Islamic edifice, but it was unable to determine whether a temple had been razed to make way for a mosque.
• “The court also decided that Hindus identify the disputed site as Lord Ram’s dwelling, whilst Muslims think it is the same as the Babri Masjid.
• The court also endorsed the Hindu view that Lord Rama was born in the disputed area where the Babri Masjid once stood.”
• The Supreme Court also ruled that the 1992 demolition of the Babri Masjid Mosque, which dates back to the 16th century, was illegal.
• The Supreme Court determined in its decision that the Waqf Central Sunni Council of Uttar Pradesh had not demonstrated the case for Ayodhya and that the Hindus had discovered that they controlled the site in the outer courtyard in dispute.
Conclusion:
The Supreme Court has granted God Ram Lalla ownership of 2,77 acres of disputed land in Ayodhya and ordered the central and state of Uttar Pradesh to provide Muslims with 5 acres of alternative land for a mosque construction. This case is significant as it covers Indian judiciary history and has been completed on November 9, 2019. Politicians often use “divide and rule” to win elections, but it is crucial to focus on core issues like poverty, unemployment, and agriculture.
FAQ’s
1)When did the legal case start for the Ayodhya dispute?
- 1885
- 1882
- 1887
2)When was the last judgement of the Ayodhya case?
a)8th November 2019
b)9th November 2019
c)10th November 2019
3)How many judges were involved in the Ayodhya case?
a)7 judges
b)5 judges
c)9 judges
4)The Supreme Court granted how many acres of disputed land in Ayodhya to the deity Ram Lalla
a)2.77 acres
b)2.78 acres
c)2.76 acres
5)When was the foundation stone for the Ram Mandir laid?
- August 4,2020
- August 3, 2020
c) August 5, 2020
Answer key
1.a) 2. b) 3.b) 4. a) 5 c)
Bibliography
Arunima, G. “Ayodhya Verdict: Bad Theology, Without Justice.” Economic & Political Weekly 45.41 (2010): 9.
Cesari, Jocelyne. “Time, Power, and Religion: Comparing the Disputes over Temple Mount and the Ayodhya Sacred Sites.” Journal of Law, Religion and State 9.1 (2021): 95- 123.
Copley, Antony. “Indian secularism reconsidered: from Gandhi to Ayodhya.” Contemporary South Asia 2.1 (1993): 47-65.
Elst, Koenraad. Ayodhya: The Case Against the Temple. New Delhi: Voice of India, 2002.
Gupta, Anupam. “Dissecting the Ayodhya Judgment.” Economic and Political Weekly (2010): 33-41.
Mehta, Deepak. “The Ayodhya dispute: The absent mosque, state of emergency and the jural deity.” Journal of Material Culture 20.4 (2015): 397-414.
Patnaik, Arun K., and Prithvi Ram Mudiam. “Indian secularism, dialogue and the Ayodhya dispute.” Religion, State & Society 42.4 (2014): 374-388.
“Rajamony, Christu. Sacred sites and international law: a case study of the Ayodhya dispute. Diss. Oxford Brookes University, 2007.”
Ali, Dr.H. and Choudhury, Dr.P. (2021). Constitutional Aspects Towards Social Networking Sites Regulation With Freedom Of Speech & Expression. International Journal of Grid and Distributed Computing, (2005-4262).
Garje, Dr.B.S. and Ali, Dr.H. (2020). AN ASSESSMENT OF STATUS OF PERSONAL LAWS IN INDIAN CONSTITUTION.
Meenu, Agrawal, A.K. and Dev, K. (2021). Study of Challenges Faced by Youth Entrepreneurs in Rural Areas of Western Uttar Pradesh. Utkal Historical Research Journal, (0976-2132)
Rani, Miss.M. and Shrivastava, Dr.G. (2021). Historical Perception and Right to Education System to Enhance the Quality of Education in India. International Journal of Grid and Distributed Computing, (2005-4262).
Sharma, Dr.J.V.P. and Parveen, Dr.S. (2021). CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK ON HISTORICAL ASPECTS OF STATUS AND REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN IN INDIA.
Author:Epsi Beula D,
a Student at Government Law College,Vellore
