Ayodhya Case Verdict: The Dispute Concludes, Here's the SC Decision

Finally, the dispute between Babri Masjid and Ram Janambhoomi came to an end. The judge announced the decision in favor of Hindus.

4 years ago
Ayodhya Case Verdict: The Dispute Concludes, Here's the SC Decision

Ram Janambhoomi-Babri Masjid Land Title Dispute had been a socio-religious dispute in the city of Ayodhya in India. The issue revolved around a site that Hindus claimed to be the birthplace of Lord Rama, whereas Muslims asserted it to be the place for their mosque.

Many Hindus believe that the mosque was constructed on the temple's ruins, and the temple was demolished by Muslims in the 16th century. Muslims said that they prayed at the mosque until 1949 when Hindus placed the statue of Ram in the mosque and started worshipping. Since then, the two communities were fighting and had filed the case who should control the site.

Hinduism is believed to be over 4000 years old, whereas India’s first Islamic dynasty was established at the beginning of the 13th century. Read what the case was and the final decision taken by the Supreme Court on 9 November 2019.

History of Ayodhya Case

Source = Zeenews

The Babri Masjid was destroyed on 6 December 1992 during a political rally. The land title case was filed in the Allahabad High Court. The decision of which was announced on 30 September 2010. The judge declared that 2.77 acres of land would be divided into three parts. 1/3rd of which will be given to Nirmohi Akhara, 1/3rd to Sunni Waqf Board, and the 1/3rd to Ram Lalla represented by Hindu Maha Sabha.

The judges stated that the land was the birthplace of Rama, and the Masjid was built after the temple’s demolition. The demolition of the mosque in 1992 engulfed several parts of India, and nearly 2000 people died.

A few minutes after the demolition of the mosque in 1992, the first FIR no 197/192 was filed against karsevaks under section 397, 395, 295, 297, 338, 337, 153A of IPC, and section 7 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act.

Second FIR no 198/92 was filed against Murli Manohar, Vinay Katiyar, Sadhvi Ritambhara,  Uma Bharti, Ashok Singhal, and L K Advani. Nearly 45 FIRs more were registered for looting cameras, assault on media persons, and more. All FIRs were registered at Thana Ramjanmabhumi in Ayodhya.

About 15 years ago, the SC said the structure was not an Islamic one, but the ASI (Archaeological Survey of India) has not established whether a temple was demolished to build a mosque. Also, Muslims could not prove the possession of the property.

The structure was tested by ASI, and then it was claimed that the site has the remains of the ancient Hindu temple. Some people also said to see the carvings of deities and other Hindu religious symbols.

Ayodhya Verdict - SC Rules in Favor of Lord Rama

On 9th November 2019, the Supreme Court declared the case in favor of Hindus, who want to build the Ram temple there. India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi said-

“No place for fear, bitterness, and negativity in New India.”

He tweeted: 

The five judges SC heard the case from August to October 2019. On 9 November 2019, the Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi declared that the land would be handled to Hindu to build the temple. The court also ordered to give 5-acre land to Sunni Waqf Board to build the mosque.

In a unanimous decision, the court said that after all the evidence presented, it is concluded that the site should be given to Hindus for temples, and Muslims would be given land to construct a mosque.

How People Reacted to This Decision by SC

Source = Huffingtonpost

Soon after it was announced that SC would declare the results on Friday (9 November 2019) at 10:30 a.m., people started spreading messages on WhatsApp groups not to circulate any message regarding Ayodhya’s case. People were appealed not to post any content on social media that would disturb law and order.

Security was deployed around the court premises, and vehicles were checked. Security outside the houses of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, and four Justices Ashok Bhushan, S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, and S Abdul Nazeer were deployed by the Delhi Police.

After the results were declared, people were happy that it was in favor of Hindus, but Muslims were also given land for the mosque. Here’s how people reacted on social media.

#HinduMuslimBhaiBhai Spread on Twitter

After Ayodhya Verdict, #HinduMuslimBhaiBhai Spread on Twitter . The people used this tag to spread love and harmony. The netizens were constantly reminding people to maintain peace and to accept the decision, whatever it is.

While some people accepted the court’s decision, a few people like Asaduddin Owaisi were disappointed by the SC decision on Ayodhya Case. He is the president of AIMIM (All India Majlis -e-Ittehadul Muslimeen).

Source = Livemint

Addressing the public meeting in Hyderabad, he said:

“If Babri Masjid was legal then why was it (land) handed over to those who demolished it. If it was illegal then why the case is going on and withdraw the case against Advani. And if it is legal then give it to me."

He further said-

"It's a basic question... We are not satisfied with this judgement. Babri Masjid is my legal right. I am fighting for the Masjid and not the land.”

He added that Muslims should fight for Masjid. He tweeted that we are not beggars but respectable citizens of India.

The Sunni Central Waqf Board Chairman Zufar Farooqui, on 10 November 2019 said, the decision on whether they would accept a 5-acre land or not given by the government will be taken after the meeting would be held on 26 November.

Highlights of the Ayodhya Case

  1. Supreme Court has given 2.77 acres of land in Ayodhya to the deity of Lord Ram.
  2. It has directed the center and UP government to allot 5 acres land to Muslims to build a mosque.
  3. It has also asked the Center to grant some representation to Nirmohi Akhara in setting up a trust.
  4. The court dismissed the appeal of Nirmohi Akhara (a Hindu religious denomination) that claimed the control of the disputed land and said they are the custodian of the land.
  5. It has ordered the Union government to form a trust in 3 months for the Ram Mandir.
  6. The court said that the disputed site at Ayodhya was not an Islamic structure. Also, the ASI has not revealed whether a temple was demolished to build a mosque.
  7. It also said that the 1992 demolition of the 16th century Babri Masjid was the violation of the law.

Final Words

Ayodhya’s case of the Babri Masjid and Ram Janmbhoomi dispute has ended. The 2.77-acre land is divided into two parts: the outer courtyard where Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabutra existed and the inner courtyard where the masjid stood till 1992.

The Hindus have proved their right over the courtyard, but Muslims failed to prove their possession on the courtyard. It has been proven that the masjid was built on the orders of Emperor Babar, but not built on the vacant land.

What are your thoughts on this case? Is SC’s decision apt for both the communities? Share your views below.


Popular Posts