| 
           | 
      
        | 
            
            
            
            
                      
             |   
          
          
          
          Lucknow/New Delhi, Sep 30 (IANS) A 125-year-old Hindu-Muslim   dispute that repeatedly frayed India's secular fabric was sought to be settled   Thursday with a court ruling that the place where the Babri mosque in Ayodhya   stood before it was razed by Hindu mobs in 1992 was indeed the birthplace of Ram   revered by millions. 
 |  
  
      
	  
	  
	  A three-judge bench, comprising a Muslim and two Hindus, of the Allahabad High   Court's Lucknow bench ruled by majority that a Ram temple had been destroyed to   build the Babri mosque in Ayodhya in the 16th century and so the mosque violated   Islamic tenets.
 But judges S.U. Khan, D.V. Sharma and Sudhir Agarwal   ruled that the entire disputed land in Ayodhya, a riverside town in Uttar   Pradesh which for decades became synonymous with Hindu-Muslim tensions, should   be divided among the Sunni Waqf Board, Hindus and the Nirmohi Akhara, a Hindu   sect who were among those who fought the court battle.
 
 The status quo,   however, would be maintained for the next three months.
 
 Despite the   divisive nature of the judgement against which both Hindu and Muslim litigants   have vowed to appeal in the Supreme Court, India -- whose over one billion   population includes 80 percent Hindus and 14 percent Muslims -- remained calm.   Both Muslim and Hindu leaders said nothing should be done to offend any   community.
 
 "The disputed site is (indeed) the birthplace of Lord Ram,"   said the brief two-page official synopsis of the judgement. It ruled that the   place of Ram's birth must also be construed as a juristic person and a   deity.
 
 "It is personified as the spirit of divine worshipped as   birthplace of Lord Rama as a child," the majority ruling said.
 
 The other   highlights of the eagerly awaited judgement were that idols of Ram were sneaked   into the Babri mosque in December 1949 and that archaeological evidence proved   that a temple had existed at the mosque site.
 
 The judgement, running into   about 10,000 pages, was furiously analysed across India, where tens of thousands   of security forces had been deployed to prevent any communal   violence.
 
 "The disputed building was constructed by (Mughal emperor)   Babar -- the year is not certain -- but it was built against the tenets of   Islam," the majority judges said. "Thus, it cannot have the character of a   mosque."
 
 The verdict sparked calls for Hindu-Muslim amity.
 
 All   India Muslim Personal Law Board's Kamal Farooqui said: "There could be a   (temple) and a (mosque) existing alongside in Ayodhya in the larger interest of   the nation. The court has opened up some consensus for us and a chance for   reconciliation."
 
 Zafaryab Jilani of the Sunni Waqf Board, whose title   suit for the Ayodhya land was dismissed by the court, vowed not to "surrender"   but added that the board would abide by anything the Supreme Court   decides.
 
 Mohan Bhagwat, chief of the Rashtriya Swayamsewak Sangh (RSS),   which played a major role in the mass movement aimed at building a Ram temple at   the Babri mosque site, said the ruling should not be seen as a victory or defeat   for anyone.
 
 "This has almost cleared the way for building a grand Ram   temple," he said, asking people to forget the bitterness of the past.
 
 The   Nirmohi Akhara, one of the three parties allotted a third of the disputed land,   hailed the ruling as a "victory for all people who have faith in Lord Ram" but   quickly added that it was no defeat or victory for any religion.
 
 Hindu   lawyer and Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader Ravi Shankar Prasad urged   Muslims, India's largest religious minority, to help in building a Ram temple at   Ayodhya.
 
 Prime Minister Manmohan Singh stepped in soon after the verdict   was announced, convening a high-level meeting to discuss the way ahead. The   central government is the custodian of the land where a makeshift Ram temple   stands.
 
 "The correct conclusion, at this stage, is that the status quo   will be maintained until the cases are taken up by the Supreme Court," he said.   "I have full faith in the people of India. I alsohave full vondidence in the   traditions of secularism..."
 
 Thursday's judicial fiat marked the end of a   chapter in a more than a century-old Hindu-Muslim dispute that has its genesis   in 1528 when a military commander of Babar is said to have built a three-domed   mosque named after the emperor.
 
 The row took a new twist in December 1949   when idols of Ram were sneaked into the mosque, leading to daily Hindu prayers.   The present case kicked off in January 1950 in a court in Faizabad, Ayodhya's   twin town.
 
 The emotive movement took a volatile turn in the 1980s when   Hindu groups began mobilizing the community so as to build a grand Ram temple at   the Babri mosque site. It quickly escalated Hindu-Muslim tensions.
 
 The   issue led to the worst eruption of Hindu-Muslim violence after India's 1947   independence when Hindu mobs demolished the Babri mosque in December 1992,   leaving over 2,000 people dead across the country.
 
 Hindu activists   quickly erected a makeshift temple on the ruins of the mosque.
 
 India Inc   hailed Thursday's judicial ruling -- and the country's ability to digest it   without taking to the streets. "The verdict is a win-win for all," said industry   lobby Assocham.
 
 Political leaders were, however, more nuanced.
 
 "We   should all welcome it. If anyone has any reservation over the verdict, the   Supreme Court is open...," Congress general secretary Janardan Dwivedi said.   "Nothing should be done to disturb harmony and peace."
 
 The Communist   Party of India-Marxist said: "In our constitutional, secular, democratic system,   judicial process which includes recourse to the Supreme Court should be the only   way to resolve the issue."
 
 
   
      
     comments... |  
   |