Team Clarion
NEW DLEHI – Former Supreme Court judge Justice RF Nariman criticised the 2019 Ayodhya judgment delivered by the Supreme Court saying “In my opinion, a great travesty of justice was that Secularism was not given its due by these judgements”.
Addressing the First Justice AM Ahmadi Memorial Lecture on “Secularism and the Indian Constitution”, Justice Nariman on Tuesday expressed concern over the recent trends of filing suits claiming temples beneath mosques.
Talking about the Ayodhya judgment which directed to build temple at the site of mosque in Ayodhya, Justice Nariman said “One other very important finding. Every single time, it is the Hindu side which has done something contrary to the rule of law. For that, reparations have to be made. What was the reparation? One would have thought they will rebuild the mosque. But it was we will give them some land to build a mosque on their own. In my humble opinion, it was a great travesty of justice that secularism was not given its due at all by these judgments”.
In his further criticism of the judgment, he noted “Despite the finding that Muslims were praying from 1857 to 1949, the Court said they cannot say they were in exclusive possession and this side was disputed. Court said it was disputed in the sense that egregious attempts were made to dislodge them contrary to rule of law, which is the finding of the court. 3 times it happened. It happened in 1857, 1934, and 1940. They go on to say that therefore, we cannot say that this side is undisputed. Whatever this means. Since this side is now undisputed, we cannot say they have exclusive possession of the inner side. Therefore, this is one composite whole and we now jump to the conclusion that the composite whole now belongs to Hindus”.
Explaining the issue further, Justice Nariman pointed out “The mosque itself was built in 1528. Then, the mosque continues as a mosque until, there was trouble in 1853. This is the first time there is trouble. After there is trouble, just as the Crown is due to take over in 1858 from the East India Company, a wall is built by the British between the inner and outer courtyard. Inner courtyard was the precincts of the mosque and the outer courtyard was just outside the precincts. After that British wall, prayer was conducted by both sides. So, outer courtyard, the prayers were conducted by Hindus and inner courtyard by Muslims. So, it’s a recorded fact that prayers were conducted on both sides right from 1857 uptil 1949….In 1949, 50-60 people stormed the mosque and put idols as a result of which, all Muslim prayers ceased”.
Former Supreme Court judge also noted that the judge who had acquitted all of the accused in the conspiracy case of Babri demolitions was made Up Lokayukta in Uttar Pradesh.
And it took him 3.5 years to go to judgment and you know what he did – acquitted everybody. And after acquitting everybody, he retired and was made Upa Lokayukta in the State of UP,” the former judge recounted.
Justice Nariman also stated that the recent trend to file suit claiming temple under mosque may lead to communal tension and disharmony.
“We find today, like hydra-heads popping up all over the country, there is suit after suit filed all over the place, not only concerning mosques, but also dargahs. And according to me, the only way of countering this – because all this can lead to communal tension and disharmony, contrary to what is envisaged both in our Constitution and the Places of Worship Act,” he said.
He further said “the only way to scotch all this and cauterise all these hydra-heads is by applying these five pages in the (Babri) judgment(which upheld the Places of Worship Act) and having it read out before each District Court and High Court because these five pages are a declaration of law by the Supreme Court which is binding on them. Once it is done, it is clear that the Places of Worship Act will take its due course… If the Act were to be applied as stated in this judgment itself, it will easily cauterise all these hydra-heads which are popping up one after the other.”
