Communist Party of India(Marxist Leninist) Red FlagCentral committee Cochin, 2019 November 11
On the Apex Court Verdict on the Babri Masjid dispute
The Supreme Court verdict on the Babri Masjid land dispute has been resulted by the detailed examination of the apex court mainly whether 1)comprehensive documents regarding title right of property was there, 2)what the findings of Archeological Survey of India indicate , 3) what the witnesses gave in their depositions regarding customary believes of the people who used the place for worship , 4) what the believes of the Hindus and Muslims led to their considerations regarding places of worship, than the historicity regarding the merit of the dispute in finally arriving at conclusive decision. This has amounted to effect 'practical solution' to one of the gravest socio-political issues that the country and its people faced for nearly 150 years.
The apex court has categorically rejected the narrative that the Babri Masjid was built demolishing the Hindu Temple of Ram Janma Bhumi. Though as per the Archeological Survey of India's findings there was remnants of a 12th century structure beneath the masjid the apex court adjudged that it was not possible to consider that that structure was of a Hindu temple. The court asserted that the Muslims had always worshipped inside the place whereas Hindus had prayed outside and never the Muslims had abandoned the place before it being locked up. The court again asserted the following:
Not religion and customs that have to be considered for deciding the matter in case if conclusive evidence of title-deed was produced. Religious belief is subjective matter of individuals hence legality of ownership rests on the basis of document, proofs and witnesses. The idol of Rama was illegally smuggled into the Babri masjid in 1949 on December 22nd. The Babri Masjid was criminally demolished on 6th December 1992 flouting Supreme Court directive.
On the basis of the said findings, while rejecting the applications for ownership of land by applicants other than Wakkaf board and directing the government to allot five acres of land to wakkaf board for building masjid, the apex court observed that millions of Hindus are of the belief that Ramjanmahumi is in Ayodhya and that defines their place of worship whereas the Muslims consider their place of worship where they build their mosque. So, though the other two parties did not have any right to land the Supreme Court found that the right to worship has to be kept up for all and hence, the land must be dealt with accordingly.
This has led the apex court to decide the disposal of the dispute that the disputed land be given to the trust being formed by the government and temple be built on it simultaneously while 5 acres of land to be given to wakkaf board. The apex court has clearly stated that the incidents of 1949 and 1992 are grave crimes that have to be tried and punished while rejecting the claims associated with the said crimes.
This verdict has categorically exposed the false narrative by communal fascists that the masjid was built demolishing a temple; it has affirmed that the heinous chain of crimes from 1949, 1992 up to till date of desecration and demolition of Babri Masjid must be tried and punished; and, has rejected the claims by such applicants for the land ownership title accordingly. These findings of the SC conform with the spirit and letter of the Constitution. At the same time the aggrieved Wakkaf board has every reason to express lack of satisfaction as the land it claimed was handed over in the name of belief to government for building temple by an appointed trust. In that case the adjudication done by the apex court has not lived to the concrete historicity of Babri Masjid. The evaluations by the SC itself has clearly led to the fact regarding construction and existence of the Masjid contrary to the claims otherwise. This naturally prompts the highest seat of jurisprudence in a modern republic to entrust the executive to persist conciliatory process keeping its custody and protection of the disputed land between the claimants till fruit of judicious justice is attained specklessly. That would definitely have glowed as high beacon of indian republic and its judicial system.
The aftermath of this verdict has proven that the restraint that the SC and the government of India had called for was kept by the Muslims and their organizations showing mellowed grace of peace loving and fraternal nature. It vouchsaves the aims and future of the nation and the republic as the fight for secularism and democracy has to go miles ahead .
M S JAYAKUMAR
GENERAL SECRETARY