A contentious chapter
When A Long-Established Dissension Was Brought To A Peaceful Rest
Ananya Grover, AIS Noida, XII B
Delhi elections are over. The past few months, especially the last weeks, witnessed some aggressive campaigning. From ‘Desh badla ab dilli badlegi’ to ‘Lage raho Kejriwal’, the promises offered were many. But one stood out for its historical significance —‘Ram Mandir’. The word was used by all political parties, albeit in different ways, but with one common motive — to evoke sentiment in their favour. The much-debated temple was also in news last week as PM Modi finally announced the trust that will head its construction.
It has been several months since the Supreme Court of India pronounced its verdict on this hallowed site. A verdict spread over 1045 pages, arousing both cheer and resentment, a verdict that came after 8 suits, 51 FIRs, and 134 years of feuding. But with the construction of the temple in full swing, all this is history. And this is not because these events date back to an era gone by, but because the sentiment that sparked the battle in the first place has also undergone a massive transformation. Over the trials and tribulations of the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, we, too, as a nation, evolved and matured, even if in bits and pieces.
A peaceful prevalence
1992. Babri Masjid was demolished by kar sewaks, sparking riots that saw the killing of over 2000 people. The Godhra riots was another bloody event in the timeline of this religious conflict. The event was triggered when 50 people who were travelling from Ayodhya to Gujarat were burnt alive in a train. What ensued was violence in Gujarat where 1000 muslims died.
With a history marred by such bloodshed, similar violence was anticipated following the 2019 verdict by SC. But to the surprise of many, peace prevailed. Not a single incident of violence was reported throughout the country. Even Ayodhya, that stood at the centre of this conflict, witnessed absolute peace. Credit must be given to the Indian populace, and the managers of law and order. Strong steps were taken by law enforcement agencies to ensure that innocent lives were not lost in the name of religion.
Section 144 was imposed in Ayodhya ahead of the verdict. Government issued an order banning all publications from publishing images of demolition of Babri Masjid. Social media was constantly monitored for any inflammatory content. Law and order is one of the pillars of any democracy and to see this pillar stand strong, even in trying times, is a worthy feat.
A welcome maturity
The judgment of the apex court in this century-old tussle of faith and justice was perhaps the last innings. The dispute first reached court in 1858, and went through a series of trials and tribulations. Prime amongst them was the 2010 verdict by Allahabad High Court that offered a tripartite decision. Now, what could have been fairer than offering an equal slice to each of the contending parties. The verdict, instead of being embraced, was contended by all.
Another nine years later, one expected similar turn of events. But in stark contrast to the past, the populace placed their faith in the hands of the highest judicial institution. Even before the verdict, one unanimous sound could be heard “we will welcome the decision, no matter what the outcome.” Status quo prevailed in the aftermath. AIMPLB said, “Not satisfied, but will respect the court.” Of course, AIMPLB is contemplating a review, but that is a right that remains within their legal ambit and cannot be denied. A sensible, neutral, and unified acceptance of the court’s wisdom and decision is showcase enough of a maturity that has often been absent from the Indian polity.
(A)political leaning
From fuelling communalism to appealing for peace, politics and, more importantly, politicians in India have indeed come a long way. And nothing says that more loudly than the Ayodhya verdict. Back in 1984, when the Ayodhya conflict was in full swing, the many politicians were seen heading the campaign that aimed to liberate the birth place of Lord Rama. Twenty years later, echoes of aligning with a certain side was evident, when the then PM announced that he will definitely build a temple at the disputed site.
Cut to 2019, when all political sundry refrained to comment on the matter, let alone aligning with either side. PM Modi’s tweet that this should not be a “win or loss for anybody” only resonated fair play. Union defence minister Rajnath Singh, too, ahead of the verdict, slammed leaders indulging in communal and appeasement politics, asking them to do away with commenting on the matter. Communal politics seems to be a thing of the past. A recent coverage of Ayodhya verdict by BBC bears testimony—“It is now not as easy to mobilise people in the name of religion…extremists have failed to garner supporters.”
A hopeful future
Karl Marx was perhaps mistaken when he reduced religion to ‘opium of people’. Or maybe he didn’t understand it fully well, when placed in context to India. The Ayodhya battle has often been criticised for using religion as a ground for divide. However, the future may prove otherwise. Economists and market analysts are optimistic that the elimination of a major uncertainty in the country’s socio-political landscape would boost global investor confidence towards the Indian economy. Nearly 1 lakh daily pilgrims from across India and abroad are expected to visit the temple and mosque in Ayodhya, bringing in revenue greater than Vaishno Devi and Tirupati. In fact, it is predicted that the temple and mosque together will draw as many as 50 lakh visitors to the state, serving as a much needed antidote to the economic slowdown. This will mean a huge revenue boost to the otherwise poor state of Uttar Pradesh.
There is neither a victor nor a vanquished, in what is essentially a contestation of faith. The Ayodhya verdict is a mere closure as well as a new beginning that could lead to a magnificent temple and a peaceful mosque co-existing in this sacred land, signifying the true values of equality and justice upon which the Indian constitution and nation have been built.
A history
Babri Masjid was supposedly constructed by Mir Baqi Mir in 1556 allegedly at the site of the birth place believed to be of Lord Rama’s. The dispute began in the 19th century. A controversy broke out in December 1949 due to a Ram Lalla idol appearing inside the mosque precincts. Ram Janmabhoomi agitation started in 1990. The mosque was demolished in December 1992, taking the case to the court. Parties such as Nirmohi Akhara, Bhagwan Sri Ram Lalla Virajman (the deity), All India Hindu Mahasabha and Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas formed the Hindu side. The Muslim side included Central Sunni Waqf Board, Mohammed Iqbal Ansari (individual litigant), M Siddiq (a deceased individual litigant) among others. The crux of the
dispute was the ownership of 2.77 acres of land.
