Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, India. (iStock photo)

The Ram Mandir-Ayodhya verdict, the second longest running legal dispute in independent India’s penal history with respect to day to day hearings that went on for 40 days, has been reserved for Nov. 4-17, writes Priyanka Bhardwaj.

The five member Supreme Court bench that presided over appeals and cross-appeals by Hindu and Muslim parties who challenged the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment that had awarded for the 2.77 acre land in the holy city of Ayodhya to be divided into equal parts between Ram Lalla represented by Hindu Maha Sabha, Nirmohi Akhada and Sunni Waqf Board comprised of the Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi, accompanied by other senior judges — SA Bobde, CY Chandrachud, Abdul Nazeer and Ashok Bhushan.

The matter reached the door steps of the apex court after the mediation panel — Shri Shri Ravi Shankar, one of the most revered spiritual Hindu gurus, a Supreme Court judge FMI Kalifulah and Shriram Panchu, a notable and respected lawyer from southern India, failed to bring the disputing parties to any amicable solution that could satisfy underlying interests of their sides.

The plot of land that is being contested by both Hindus and Muslims is situated in Ayodhya, a town standing on the banks of River Saryu in northern state of Uttar Pradesh (up), and the political, socio-cultural and religious significance and ramifications can be gauged from the fact that this city, formerly known as Saketa was considered as amongst the most sacred Hindu sites where one could attain Moksha or liberation from the cycle of birth and death as it was believed to be the birthplace of Bhagwan Rama,  immensely revered as the seventh incarnation of Lord Vishnu.

The antiquity of the significance of the site is evident from its explicit mention in ancient scriptures and texts such as the Garuda Purana and Ayodhya Mahatmya that date back several centuries from the rule of Mughals in India.

During medieval times, as per popular tradition and the inscription on the mosque and as attested by East India Company’s surveyor Francis Buchanan in early 19th century, General Mir Baqi, on the orders of the Muslim-Mughal conqueror, Babar, demolished the Ram temple that stood at the site of the birth place of Lord Rama to erect a mosque in c1528 and the Babri mosque was again rebuilt by the last of the mighty Mughal Emperors, Aurangzeb.

That the mosque was superimposed on the temple is a fact that has been proven archeologically and a plethora of medieval writings by the likes of Abul Fazl, Tulsidas, William Finch and even Babar-Namah that only talk of Rama’s birthplace but no mosque, thus leading to the Allahabad High Court’s treatment of this dispute as one of a land title.

The veracity of the presence of a mosque emerge from the purchase-documents of the land of the mosque and surrounding area by a Rajput noble in Mughal court in 1717, in which the three-domed structure resembling a mosque was explicitly labeled as “birthplace” or chhathi and Hindu devotees were shown circumambulating (parikrama) and worshipping around the Ram Chabutra or platform.

This piece of information and details of a vedi or a baby cradle at the site around which thousands of Hindu pilgrims do parikrama on Ram Navami was further corroborated by a Jesuit priest Joseph Tieffenthaler, an early European geographer as much as he described in detail, though in the subsequent era of British rule of the subcontinent, when the conflict first erupted in 1850s and Hindus started clamoring for possession of Babri Mosque as also the first legal case for the same was filed in 1885 by a local mahant (Hindu seer), the British authorities viewed the issue as no more than a law and order issue that required an urgent resolution.

However, it was only in independent India, especially during the Rajiv Gandhi headed Congress rule that was perceived to be inclined towards Muslims that the Hindus were allowed in full to worship at the site (1986 by Allahabad High Court judgment) and this along with plans for a grand Ram Temple at the site infuriated the Muslim parties as much as the Hindu right wing organisations who wanted to assert their rights to faith and belief and build a Ram Temple.

The “Ram Rath Yatras” (Ram Chariot Travel) by Hindu leaders finally culminated in a humongous rally in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992 when Hindu kar sevaks or volunteers went on a rampage and demolished the mosque in a matter of few hours.

Since then the government has been the non-partisan party keeper of the site till the matter remains sub-judice, and in the meantime the Liberhan Commission, one of the longest running commissions, has named several prominent leaders such as late Prime Minister Atal Bihari Bajpai, LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, UP Chief Minister Kalyan Singh and others guilty of provoking demolition.

In the current arguments in the SC the Muslim sides have argued that while they have exclusive title over the land, the Hindus enjoyed mere prescriptive rights to enter and pray at the Ram Chhabutra, and therefore restoration of the mosque is deemed right.

However, the Hindu side has based its argument on the Sanskrit shloka, “Janani janmabhoomischa swargadapi gariyasi” (a birthplace is greater than heaven) that presses for rectification of a “continuing blunder” and allowing Hindus to practice their right to worship at the site, building of Ram Temple and declaration of deity “Ram Lalla Virajaman” (baby Rama) as one of the litigants.

K Parasaran, the 93 year old energetic lawyer for the Hindus, argued that that the Muslim party was ineligible to claim land-title over the disputed land under the doctrine of adverse possession as the deity or the temple was the previous real owner.

He pointed out that Muslims could offer “namaz” in other places in Ayodhya while for Hindus, the place of birth of Ram could not change, and also since faith should not be made subject to scientific or judicial enquiry the title of the properties be handed to the latter.

The high octane hearings also witnessed Rajeev Dhawan, the lawyer representing the Muslim parties, infamous for losing temper in the court, tearing up documents of latest evidence presented by the opposition parties and calling them foolish!

As of now, no national level political party has ever promised rebuilding of the mosque as there is a silent appreciation that the Muslim parties have no strong a case in the matter, but then the building of a Hindu temple on the grounds of the former Babri Mosque has been one of the core demands of only the Hindu nationalist movement as also the present Narendra Modi led NDA government that has recently dared to abrogate Article 370 to do away with autonomy of erstwhile Jammu and Kashmir.

It, however, remains to be seen if the most awaited verdict of the country to be delivered shortly before Gogoi retires on November 17th will allow for quietus to prevail or a median formula shall achieve broader acceptability to sort out thorns that have time and again tended to tear into the composite Hindu-Muslim fabric of the Indian milieu.

Meanwhile the government is on alert to nip any evil designs of jihadist potentates from disrupting communal harmony.