Ayodhya verdict: Disputed site is birthplace of Lord Ram‎

Lucknow (Uttar Pradesh): The 3-judge Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court in a majority decision ruled on Thursday that Ram was born at the spot and that his idol should remain there.

Justice S U Khan said let the land be divided in three parts, one each for the Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and the party representing Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha – the party for Lord Ram. Khan said the area where Ram’s idol is should be given to Hindus. Muslims to be given a separate portion of the courtyard, and third litigant Nirmohi Akhara another section of the courtyard.

Justice D V Sharma decreed the title suit in favour of Hindus, said lawyer K N Bhatt, who represented the party on behalf of ‘Ram Lalla’.

Justice Sudhir Agarwal ruled that the area where Ram’s idol has been installed should be given to Hindus.

The Sunni Wakf Board’s plea for upholding title on land was dismissed.

The court also said status quo will be maintained at the disputed site in Ayodhya for three months, claimed lawyers Ravi Shanker Prasad and K N Bhatt.

The 2.7 acres of land on which the Babri Masjid stood built by Babar’s noble Mir Baki in 1528.

The only hurdle in the pronouncement of this verdict was cleared by the Supreme Court on Tuesday when it dismissed the petition by retired bureaucrat Ramesh Chandra Tripathi for deferment of the keenly-awaited judgement.

An amicable solution could not be reached through negotiations between the two religious groups for decades, and, therefore, the verdict.

Meanwhile, Uttar Pradesh and most of the country remained under a thick security blanket with aerial vigil of sensitive places, including the disputed site at Ayodhya continuing.

The Allahabad High Court was declared a ‘no-access zone’ restricting entry to all except those connected with the case.

The intelligence network was also on high alert throughout Uttar Pradesh to monitor movement and activities of anti-social elements.

Police sources said the force deployment has been such – almost 1,90,000 security personnel in the state – that it would take minimum time to reach any trouble spot.

Helicopters have been kept on alert and asked to keep a vigil on activities of mischievous elements, sources said, adding though there is no ban on movement of people but strict vigil is being maintained and hospitals and doctors have been put on alert to remain prepared in case of any eventuality.

Three dog squads, four bomb disposal squads, five anti-sabotage teams and fire tenders have also been deployed at strategic points in Ayodhya and Faizabad where a total of 20 companies (over 2,000 personnel) of CRPF have been deployed for the inner security of the Ram Janambhoomi complex, besides 38 other companies of police and PAC for the twin towns and 16 other companies for rural areas, police sources said.

A control room has been set up at the DGP headquarters here with six phone numbers being made public to facilitate any information about trouble-makers.

The security of the three judges of the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court, who pronounced the verdict, was also increased.

Borders with adjoining Nepal and Uttarakhand have been sealed and a strict vigil is being maintained on all those coming to the state from these sides.

Security forces have staged flag marches in all sensitive places and districts, including Lucknow, Ayodhya, Varanasi and Mathura, in the state and prohibitory orders are in force at some of the places, sources said.

On the eve of the verdict, Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and UPA chairperson Sonia Gandhi had appealed for peace, saying the verdict was only the first step in a judicial process with further legal recourse available to anyone who wanted to take the matter forward.

Union Home Minister P Chidambaram has said that the Ayodhya verdict cannot be allowed to derail the ‘India Story’. He said people had moved on from 1992, young people had moved on and that the India Story was much bigger than a dispute over a place.

Through the decades, repeated attempts were made by former Prime Ministers P V Narasimha Rao, V P Singh and Chandra Shekhar to persuade the two sides to reach a compromise, but with little success.

The Ayodhya dispute has been an emotive issue for decades and mired in a slew of legal suits involving Hindu and Muslim religious groups.

The first title suit in the case was filed in 1950 by one Gopal Singh Visharad, seeking an injunction for permitting ‘pooja'(worship) of Lord Ram at the disputed site while the second suit was filed by Paramhans Ramchandra Das also in 1950 seeking the same injunction but this was later withdrawn.

The third suit was filed in 1959 by the Nirmohi Akhara, seeking direction to hand over the charge of the disputed site from the receiver and the fourth one came in 1961 by UP Sunni Central Board of Waqfs for declaration and possession of the site.

The fifth suit was moved on July one, 1989 in the name of Bhagwan Shri Ram Lalla Virajman also for declaration and possession.

Through an application moved by then advocate general of UP, all the four suits were transferred to the High Court in 1989.

As many as 94 witnesses have appeared before the court — 58 from Hindu side and 36 from Muslim side — during regular hearings of the case which began on January 10, 2010.

The High Court, while adjudicating the case, also asked the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) to carry out excavation in the area surrounding the disputed site to find out whether temple was there before mosque was built.

The excavation, which was done in the presence of representatives from Hindus and Muslims, went on for more than five months between March and August in 2003.

Hearing in the case taken up on a day-to-day basis from January this year was completed on July 26 and the special Bench had reserved its verdict asking the parties concerned to approach the OSD in case there was any scope of resolution to the case through reconciliation.

Since none of the parties made any attempt in this direction, the court had on September 8 fixed September 24 as the date for pronouncement of the verdict. It was fixed for September 30 after the apex court dismissed a plea for deferment of the High Court verdict.

The three main issues before the High Court were whether there was a temple at the disputed site prior to 1528, whether the suit filed by the Sunni Central Waqf Board in 1961 is barred by limitation and whether Muslims perfected their title through adverse possession.

The history of the dispute goes back to the year 1528 when a mosque was built on the site by Mughal emperor Babar which Hindus claim to be the birth place of Lord Ram and that a temple existed there earlier.

In order to settle the dispute, the British officials in 1859 erected a fence to separate the places of worship, allowing the inner court to be used by Muslims and the outer court by Hindus and this system went on till 1949 when an idol of Lord Ram surfaced inside the mosque.

The authorities then declared the premises a disputed area and locked the gates which were unlocked after 37 years by a District Judge in 1986 to allow ‘darshan’.

With the passage of time, the dispute took political colour. The Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992 in the presence of senior leaders of VHP, Shiv Sena and BJP.

The demolition of the mosque had triggered communal riots in several parts of the country in which more than 2,000 lives were lost.