Ayodhya Judgement: A victory of faith over reason

Ayodhya

Ayodhya

This judgment must be challenged in the Supreme Court and we hope that the august body would give a second thought to its legal, social, ethical and political repercussions.

THAT THE Ayodhya verdict was hailed with euphoric exultation by the Ram Janam Bhumi lawyers, who were showing the victory signs soon after the announcement, despite the restrictions on any such show by court in advance, simply reflects the respect of law they have.

That this verdict is victory of forces, who had pulled down the historic mosque does need any proof for the readers and viewers. Sangh Parivar rightly felt that it would pave the way for the grand Ram temple and they lost no time in indirectly advising Muslims to give up the one third of the area the verdict has given to them.

Should there be any need in future to cite an example where faith and belief prevailed so powerfully over the law and reason, this judgment would be available for easy reference. It would beckon form the ramparts of temples of Justice. Ironically, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat talked about the need to see the verdict “not as a victory of one group or defeat of another, but an opportunity to forget ill-will, hard feelings that were the results of the past conflicts.” I don’t know if he could have uttered the same dialogues if the verdict was gone against their designs.

Many Muslims are sulking and they have no choice but to knock the doors of Supreme Court against the verdict. For RSS and its cronies, this judgment has given a boost to their sagging morale. Their political movement got legitimacy and they can boast of victory. This judgment has opened the new avenues for their future adventures – Kashi, Mathura.

The judgment had nothing to say, as it was not asked to say though it delved in to different domains which had little relevance to the legal aspects of the case, about the criminal razing of a historical structure. It is strange that the court accepted that no mosque was pulled down to build Babri Masjid and Ram Lalla was never there before 1949. Still, to maintain the law and order it thought it appropriate to give precedence to Astha and belief over the concrete history, evidence and reason.

There are thousands of monuments, Buddhist temples, Jain temples, churches, mosques and synagogues which are built at places which have outlived their original utility. What is the difference between pulling down Babri Mosque and razing the Statues of Buddha in Afghanistan. Both the acts are akin and reprehensible in nature. In a majority dominated country if a ground fact that was created by the honchos of majority in 1949 with the connivance of State administration could become an integral part of faith in a judgment in 2010, we have little light to see at the end of the tunnel.

This judgment must be challenged in the Supreme Court and we hope that the august body would give a second thought to its legal, social, ethical and political repercussions.

Naim Naqvi

Naim Naqvi

Did his graduation in Science discipline from AMU in 1972-73. He was Secretary of University Ali Society in 1970 and M.M. Hall Literary Society in early 70 's and member of Tayyabji Literary Society. Did his Diploma in Bakery Administration from HTT College Oxford Street London in 1987. Worked with National Herald - Delhi, Blitz - Bombay as Trainee Journalist and in Production Department with 'Naya Sansar Pictures' of Khwaja Ahmed Abbas at Bombay in early 70's. Traveled for study and training purposes to Germany, U.K., Switzerland, France, Dubai, Oman, AbuDhabi, Bahrain and Philepines.

More Posts

Leave a Reply