By Dr. Satywan Saurabh Prime Minister Narendra Modi recently launched a funding facility of Rs 1 lakh crore under the Agricultural Infrastructure Fund. This fund has been launched as part of ‘Self-reliant India’ to make farmers self-reliant. This fund will help create ‘post-harvest crop management infrastructure’ and ‘community agricultural assets’ such as cold storages, collection […]
By RK SINHA
At long last in the land of Ram a Ram Temple will be built where he was born. Supreme Court of India has on the basis of evidence has said that Babri Masjid was built at the place which was birth place of Lord Ram. This judgment of the Supreme Court is significant since it was delivered unanimously by the 5 –Judge Constitution Bench which also included Justice S Abdul Nazeer who belongs to Muslim community. All Judges admitted that it was the place of birth of Ram. That the place was the birth place of Ram was based on research oriented excavation of the site by the Archeological Survey of India. The ASI had discovered that there was a Ram Temple at the site where Mir Baqi, a Minister of Mughal Emperor Babar built Babri Masjid in 1528. This helped the Supreme Court in deciding the case.
The Supreme Court Bench admitted that Babri Masjid was built at the same place where Ram Temple built in 12th Century stood once. However, the Constitution Bench also noted the fact that there is no evidence to show that the Ram Temple was destroyed before building the Babri Masjid. Obviously it is not easy to find evidence of an act committed in 1528 in the year 2019. But the Supreme Court outright rejected the contention of the Sunni Waqf Board that Babri Masjid was built on open or virgin land.
With the verdict of the Supreme Court on November 9 five hundred year old dispute is also over now. Grand Temple will be built at the birth place of Lord Ram. Many lives were lost by forces who tried to disturb communal harmony on this issue in the past. In His own land of Bharat Ram was subjected to disrespect. Can anyone imagine Bharat without Ram? Ram is present everywhere in every soul of Indians. For thousands of years Ram has been worshipped and is revered by all. Act of encroachment on birth place of Ram is not less than an act of sin. The Supreme Court has ended that piece of injustice by its November 9 judgment.
The judgment of the Supreme Court should also be seen as a big step in building social and communal harmony. Though the Supreme Court has rejected the claim of Sunni Waqf Board on 2.77 acre of land at the site, it has at the same time directed the Central Government and the State Government of Uttar Pradesh to allot 5 acre of land to Muslim community for building a new mosque in Ayodhya. This directive assumes significance since it is also a step in building communal harmony in the country.
It is unfortunate that Zafaryab Jilani, a senior member of All India Muslim Personal Law Board and advocate who pleaded the case of Sunni Waqf Board is making negative statement on the verdict. Jilani is saying that the Supreme Court has not done justice to the Muslims although he has been maintaining throughout the hearing of the petition that the judgement of the Supreme Court will be acceptable to all and no question should be raised once the judgment is delivered.
Like Jilani, Lok Sabha Member from Hyderabad Asaduddin Owasi is also making noise by criticizing the judgment when he says that the Supreme Court had given its verdict on faith and not on facts. Owaisi has also rejected the offer of 5 acre land to be given to build a new mosque in Ayodhya by saying that “We don’t need land in charity to build mosque”.
It will be in the fitness of things that contempt of court should be filed against Jilani and Owasi who are trying to destablise the social and communal harmony of the country by making irresponsible statement. Jilani and Owasi forget that by making irresponsible statement they are giving ammunition to anti-social elements in the society to flare communal disharmony and may be even communal violence.
The Supreme Court in its judgment has also rejected the claim of Nirmohi Akhara who was a party in the title suite petition. The verdict is not in favour or against any party in the dispute the verdict is based on justice and on evidence. There is peace and harmony in the country after the judgment. People are doing their job and leading normal life all over the country. How a small section of society can be given license to vitiate the peaceful atmosphere of the society post the Ayodhya verdict.
There is remarkable change in the Indian society which is not the same as it was in 1992. We are living in 2019.
India has become a matured nation. It has the resilience to take any judgment on any dispute.
(The writer is a Rajya Sabha Member)