|
Showing posts with label Court ruling. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Court ruling. Show all posts

May 09, 2023

India: UP Court Convicts two for 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots for gang-rape

 livelaw.in

 2013 Muzaffarnagar Riots: UP Court Convicts Two In A Case Of Gang Rape, Awarded 20-Year Rigorous Imprisonment
Sparsh Upadhyay
9 May 2023 

A trial court in Uttar Pradesh's Muzaffarnagar district today CONVICTED 2 accused in a case of gang rape of a woman during the 2013 Muzaffarnagar riots under Section 376(2)(g), 376-D and 506 IPC. 

The Additional District and Sessions Judge, Anjani Kumar Singh convicted accused Maheshvir and Sikander. Another accused Kuldeep died during the course of the trial. The accused have been awarded 20 years of rigorous imprisonment and Rs. 10,000/- fine under Section 367D IPC, 10 years of imprisonment under Section 376 (2)(g) IPC and a fine of Rs. 5000/- and 2 years of imprisonment under Section 506 IPC.

The victim was among the 7 women who had alleged that were raped during the 2013 riots, however, amid threats, 6 women chose not to pursue their case, leaving only the present victim to contest her case in Court. The sole victim was represented and provided assistance by Senior Advocate Vrinda Grover.

The victim was also represented by Advocates Ratna Appnender, Devika Tulsiani, Soutik Banerjee and Mannat Tipnis.  [ . . . ]

https://www.livelaw.in/news-updates/2013-muzaffarnagar-riots-up-court-convicts-gang-rape-228299

March 29, 2023

India's Supreme Court Says Abjuring hate speech fundamental requisite for maintenance of communal harmony (Report in the Hindu)

Abjuring hate speech fundamental requisite for maintenance of communal harmony: SC


 The Supreme Court also asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta what actions
have been taken pursuant to lodging of FIRs as merely registering
complaints is not going to solve the problem of hate speech

 
March 28, 2023
   
The Supreme Court on March 28 observed that abjuring hate speech is a
fundamental requisite for maintenance of communal harmony in the country. A
bench of Justices K.M. Joseph and B.V. Nagarathna made the observation
while hearing a plea against hate speeches.

 [ . . . ]

https://www.thehindu.com/news/national/abjuring-hate-speech-fundamental-requisite-for-maintenance-of-communal-harmony-sc/article66671651.ece

September 21, 2022

India: What will happen at Gyanvapi ? ... Hindutva tactics on Mosque to Temple & response Varanasi District Court order transforms Gyanvapi mosque into a disputed site

At Gyanvapi, the law feeds into BJP’s political imagination

Hilal Ahmed writes: It is important to remember that the Gyanvapi dispute is not going to recreate any new secular-communal type political binary. It will be accommodated as a part of the ruling party's ongoing narrative.

Written by Hilal Ahmed
Updated: September 21, 2022

The Varanasi District Court order has legally transformed the Gyanvapi mosque into a disputed site. The court has accepted the legal claim made by five Hindu women for the “restoration of Darshan, Pooja, Aarti, Bhog and performance of rituals at the principal seat of Asthan of Lord Adi Visheshwar and of Goddess Maa Shringar Gauri”.

It is true that the Gyanvapi dispute is not entirely new. It has a long and violent history. The recent verdict, nevertheless, has given it a completely different direction. The conflict can no longer be described as a politically-motivated mosque/temple dispute. It has now acquired a legitimate legal overtone, which is going to contribute significantly to the emerging political discourse.

The conversion of the Gyanvapi mosque into a disputed site, broadly speaking, underlines three very important political aspects.

First, the status of the Gyanvapi mosque as a functional religious place of worship has important political significance. Unlike Babri Masjid, which was a non-functional and almost abandoned structure, Gyanvapi is a living mosque. It is open to Muslim worshippers and they are allowed to use it for performing namaz five times a day.

This Muslim visibility did not pose any challenge to Hindu religious practices and rituals performed at various associated ghats around the Gyanvapi mosque complex in the past. Banaras has always been a multi-religious city and it has never been possible to think of it in purely Hindu religious terms.

The recent developments, however, have transformed the Muslim presence in the city, especially around the Ganga ghats, into a problem category. The Kashi-Vishwanath corridor, which aims to ensure easy movement of pilgrims and devotees between the ghats and the temple, has defined the urban landscape from an overtly Hindu perspective. There is no imagination of a functional mosque in this framework. There are designated routes to visit the temple; while there is no special arrangement for the Muslim worshippers.

This new urban landscape has the potential to exclude Muslim presence in two ways. In a highly volatile anti-Muslim environment, it is very easy to envisage the existence of an Islamic place of worship inside a temple complex as a symbol of Hindu slavery and victimhood. At the same time, the history of Islamic iconoclasm, especially associated with Aurangzeb, also finds a hospitable space in this urban configuration. The proactive claim that contemporary Muslims celebrate the acts and deeds of Muslim rulers gets legitimacy in this schema.

The second aspect of Gyanvapi politics is inextricably linked to the Babri Masjid case, especially the legal closure of the dispute. Two kinds of arguments are made in this regard. On the one hand, the scope of the local land disputes related to the places of worship is redefined in a broad civilisational framework. The inevitable clash between Hinduism and Islam as incompatible civilisations is evoked to establish a link between Babri Masjid and Gyanvapi mosque. It is alleged that Muslim rulers demolished Hindu temples primarily for religious purposes. In other words, Islamic religious practices are responsible for Hindu vulnerability.

There is also a site versus structure argument. It has been claimed that the Gyanvapi dispute might be solved by evoking the formula adopted in the Ayodhya case. It is worth noting that the Supreme Court made a distinction between the site or the land and the built structure in the Ayodhya case. The site was given to Hindus to build a temple; while alternative space was given to Muslims to reconstruct a new mosque. It is suggested that a similar arrangement could be made in the Gyanvapi case as well.

This brings us to the third specific aspect of Gyanvapi politics. It is important to remember that the Gyanvapi dispute is not going to recreate any new secular-communal type political binary. Hindutva as a form of nationalism has already emerged as the hegemonic narrative of politics. Non-BJP political parties are not in a position to take up the issue of the Gyanvapi mosque for any electoral adventure. They do not have the courage to take a principled position based on historical sensitivity and political pragmatism.

It certainly gives a political advantage to the BJP. Prime Minister Narendra Modi represents the Varanasi constituency in the Lok Sabha. He has taken a special interest in the redevelopment of the Kashi-Vishwanath corridor project. The Gyanvapi case, in this sense, fits well in this schema.

However, this is not as simple as it appears. The BJP and RSS are fully aware of the advantages and disadvantages associated with the Gyanvapi issue. Narendra Modi’s December 2021 speech is very relevant in this regard.

Inaugurating the Kashi Vishwanath Dham Corridor he did not make any controversial or direct statement on the Gyanvapi dispute. He did invoke the ever-conflicting images of Aurangzeb and Shivaji in this speech; yet, he was conscious enough to avoid any direct reference to the mosque. RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat has also been very categorical about it. He has argued that the legal process, in this case, should be respected by all parties.

The Gyanvapi dispute, it seems, is not going to be the central thematic concern for electoral politics in near future. It is likely that the opposition might not find any electoral potential in it. The BJP, on the other hand, will try to accommodate the legalisation of the Gyanvapi issue in its broad Hindutva-centric development narrative.

The legal proceedings, in this case, will contribute to existing political imaginations, arguments and claims.

Advertisement

The writer is associate professor at the Centre for the Study of Developing Societies (CSDS), New Delhi

 

source URL: https://indianexpress.com/article/opinion/columns/hilal-ahmed-gyanvapi-law-feeds-into-bjps-political-imagination-8162270/
 

September 17, 2021

Conservative India is told by a Court in Sept 2021 that 'Adults have right to choose their partner, irrespective of religion'

 Adults have right to choose their partner, irrespective of religion: Allahabad High Court

Granting protection to couple, Court say not even parents could object to the relationship

Prayagraj (Uttar Pradesh), September 17

The Allahabad High Court has observed that adults have the right to choose their life partner, irrespective of the religion professed by them.

The court made this observation on Thursday while granting protection to an interfaith couple from Gorakhpur. "In such a case, not even their parents can object to their relationship," the court further observed.

Hearing a petition jointly filed by Shifa Hasan and her Hindu partner, a division bench comprising justice Manoj Kumar Gupta and Justice Deepak Verma said, "It cannot be disputed that two adults have the right of choice of their matrimonial partner, irrespective of the religion professed by them." [ . . . ]

https://www.tribuneindia.com/news/nation/adults-have-right-to-choose-their-partner-irrespective-of-religion-allahabad-high-court-312511

 

November 24, 2020

India: Allahabad High Court Rules that ‘Right to Choose a Partner is a Fundamental Right’

 Thw Quint

‘Right to Choose a Partner is a Fundamental Right’: Allahabad HC

HC rules that previous court orders which said that conversion for sake of marriage were illegal, are not good law.

Updated: 

A division bench of the Allahabad High Court on Wednesday, 11 November, held that two previous orders by single judges of the court, which had said that conversion purely for the sake of marriage was illegal, were not good law.

“Right to live with a person of his/her choice irrespective of religion professed by them, is intrinsic to the right to life and personal liberty,” the two-judge bench held, adding that “Interference in a personal relationship would constitute a serious encroachment into the right to freedom of choice of the two individuals.”

The HC asserts that the matter of a religious conversion is irrelevant if both the parties are adults and in a consenting relationship. The right of two adults to stay together cannot be encroached upon by the state.

[ . . . ]

read full text here:  https://www.thequint.com/news/india/right-to-choose-a-partner-is-a-fundamental-right-allahabad-hc

 


October 01, 2020

Press Statement: Babri Demolition Judgement: Yet another nail in Democracy‘s coffin | Oct 1 2020

Press Statement Babri Demolition Judgement: Yet another nail in Democracy‘s coffin Rights Activists, Feminists Condemn Babri Verdict, Demand that CBI Appeal Activists and feminists from Mumbai join the wider Indian human rights and minority community in condemning, outright, the travesty of a Judgement in the Babri Masjid Demolition Criminal Case. Not only have none of the 32 accused been found guilty, most of whom are prominent players in the current ruling political dispensation in both Delhi and the state of Uttar Pradesh, but the sheer delay in pronouncement of this verdict makes it a sham on the due process of law. Hard documentary evidence as also powerful witness testimonies from those present, including police officials, have been willfully ignored. There are Videos and Photos of the Demolition, the “leaders” who today claim they are vindicated, have been seen and heard provoking mobs and leading sustained mass campaigns that ensured the demolition did happen. To say that this verdict is the latest in many to spell a death knell for Constitutional Constitutional Law, Morality and the Rule of Law would not be an exaggeration. We would like to remind all Indians that the entire campaign that led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid, not only let loose a particularly genocidal character of communal violence where Muslims became repeatedly the target (be it Meerut-Hashimpur, 1997, Bhagalpur, 1989, Ahmedabad, Hubli, Bhiwandi-Bombay, Jaipur among only some instances) but Advani’rathyatra made it abundantly clear that he was not carrying a message of peace. Pictures of him carrying a trishul, an axe, a sword and a bow and arrow were constant. A systematic demonization campaign against Indian Muslims, manipulating history and militarizing Lord Ram was employed. Among the telling eye witness accounts –including the one by Ruchira Gupta, then with the Business India magazine—was the one by CRPF woman personnel, Anju Gupta. “On December 6, 1992 Advani made a spirited speech from the Ram Katha KunjManch, barely 150-200 metres from the disputed site, which charged the people. He repeatedly said that the temple would be constructed at the same site,” Gupta told the trial court. She also said that when the karsevaks began demolishing the Babri Masjid none of the BJP leaders who were present, including Advani, made any efforts to stop them. Once the mosque was demolished, the BJP leaders distributed sweets, according to Gupta’s testimony. Despite all this, we have a verdict that has shattered the faith of common Indians. LK Advani and several others, including Murli Manohar Joshi, who were charged with criminal conspiracy enjoy the impunity provided by a government determined to protect the perpetrators of this Violent and Criminal act. We would also like to remind Indians that it was under the first NDA government in 2001, that the Allahabad high court dropped the charge of criminal conspiracy in this case: the charge was restored by the Supreme Court in 2017, which described the act of demolishing the mosque as a crime that shaken the ‘secular fabric of the Constitution’. But for the intervention of the Supreme Court the trial would not have reached completion. It is to draw national attention to the far reaching implications of the September 30, 2020 verdict in Lucknow that we invite you to an online Press Conference/Meeting on October 1 at 4 p.m. Speakers are : Teesta Setalvad - Human rights Activist and Journalist (CJP), adv Mihir Desai - PUCL, Meena Menon - Journalist and Author of Riots and After in Bombay, Flavia Agnes - Women activist and Lawyer (Majlis),Shakil Ahmed - Human rights Activist , Farookh mhapkar- Survivor of Bombay Riots Time at 4pm Date: 1st Oct October, Zoom meeting ID:8025489938 Passcode: 973440 We would also like to remind all Indians that the Indian Muslim community, the specific target of not just blood letting but a sustained other-ing campaign that seeks to render it to nothing less than second class status, has reposed faith in the Constitution and democracy when the nation including the Judiciary has failed them, since December 6, 1992. Indian Muslims have, in large measure, demonstrated patience nationwide, when Supreme Court, in a questionable verdict, while recognizing the “crime committed on December 6, 1992”. awarded the land on which the demolished Babri Masjid once stood a section of Hindus that have agitated this violent agitation. Tragically yesterday’s decision is in line with a long line of judicial pronouncements that has betrayed Constitutional and criminal law, let down the faith of the most marginalized in India’s secular democratic stricture. Way back in 1994, the words of a five-member bench of the Supreme Court are telling. Calling the demolition “ National Shame’, the Court had said that the criminal act shook the ‘faith in the rule of law and constitutional processes. A five-hundred-year-old structure which was defenceless and whose safety was a sacred trust in the hands of the State Government was demolished’. The CBI must appeal this Judgement and the Guilty must be Punished. Behalf of organiser Hasina khan Contact: 09870162113

September 30, 2020

India: Babri Judgment Counter To Constitution, Supreme Court Verdict: Congress | NDTV report, September 30, 2020

Congress also accused the BJP and its ideological mentor RSS of a "deep rooted conspiracy" to destroy the country's "communal amity and brotherhood to for "usurping power at any cost". Edited by Anindita Sanyal Updated: September 30, 2020 [ . . . ] https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/babri-judgment-counter-to-constitution-supreme-court-verdict-congress-2303250?amp=1

India: What Liberhan Commission Had Said About Leaders Acquitted In Babri Demolition Case | Puneet Nicholas Yadav 30 September 2020

Liberhan told Outlook that the commission had given an elaborate account of the evidences it had gathered during the tenure of its inquiry and that the court’s verdict is 'completely contrary to the conclusions of the commission'. https://www.outlookindia.com/website/story/india-news-what-liberhan-commission-had-said-about-leaders-acquitted-in-babri-demolition-case/361193?

IndiA: Aghast at the Babri Masjid verdict, I apologise to the thousands whose lives were ruined, and bemoan the debasement of an ancient religion, writes Jyoti Punwani | SEPT 30, 2020

You see a massive crime unfolding before you. You follow its every evil turn and twist, aghast at the depths to which the perpetrators can go, shocked at the way they destroy others’ lives. Then, the judge acquits them all, blaming unknown persons for bringing the perpetrators’ plans to fruition. What then of the things you saw, the consequences of which are being played out till today? That’s the reason I cannot bring myself to read CBI judge SK Yadav’s judgment acquitting all the accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case. As a journalist, read it I must, but first, I must apologise for it. The apology is to the thousands whose lives were ruined by the movement to demolish Ayodhya’s Babri Masjid and build a Ram Mandir at the very spot where it stood. Mandir wahin banayengey, the slogan of the Ayodhya movement launched by the Vishwa Hindu Parishad and then led by BJP leader LK Advani, left no one in doubt about its intention. The decade from 1982 to 1992 saw Hindu-Muslim riots erupt in places hitherto untouched to any serious extent by communal violence. The VHP’s yatras during that decade, aimed at arousing Hindus to support their cause, and then Advani’s rath yatra, unleashed such venom that small towns even in Karnataka and Kerala erupted. [ . . . ] https://www.firstpost.com/india/aghast-at-the-babri-masjid-verdict-i-apologise-to-the-thousands-whose-lives-were-ruined-and-bemoan-the-debasement-of-an-ancient-religion-writes-jyoti-punwani-8866901.html

November 14, 2019

November 12, 2019

India - Ayodhya verdict by Supreme Court: High-minded secular rhetoric doesn’t blunt majoritarian edge of ruling

The Times of India

High-minded secular rhetoric doesn’t blunt majoritarian edge of ruling
November 10, 2019, 2:45 am IST in Aakarvani | India | TOI
 
A few days ago, on November 4, the Indian Supreme Court passed an unusual order. Justices Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose were hearing the criminal appeal No 1638 of 2019 (Surekha Nitin Kapse against the State of Maharashtra — the specifics of the case are unknown).
The justices said: “On perusal of the judgment we find it is unintelligible and we could not decipher what has been decided by the High Court. We accordingly set aside the order and remit the matter to the High Court. We request the High Court to pass an order which we can understand.”

Let us turn to the Babri mosque judgment. Offering all the qualifications that are expected from plebeians (“I have full faith in the judiciary!” “I have highest respect for the law” etc) I would like to ask the same of the bench that passed an order that to me appears unintelligible and undecipherable. It may be too much however to request the judges to set the thing aside. But perhaps if we go through it together perhaps we might find the sense in it. Ready? Here goes.
Before delivering their judgment, the judges first sent down homilies. In their words: “For a case replete with references to archaeological foundations, we must remember that it is the law which provides the edifice upon which our multicultural society rests…  At the heart of the Constitution is a commitment to equality upheld and enforced by the rule of law. Under our Constitution, citizens of all faiths, beliefs and creeds seeking divine provenance are both subject to the law and equal before the law. The Constitution does not make a distinction between the faith and belief of one religion and another. All forms of belief, worship and prayer are equal.”
That is clear. Next, the judges said that “the dispute is over immovable property. The court does not decide title on the basis of faith or belief but on the basis of evidence.” The court said that “between 22/23 December 1949, the mosque was desecrated by the installation of Hindu idols. The ouster of the Muslims on that occasion was not through any lawful authority but through an act which was calculated to deprive them of their place of worship.”
That is also clear. Next, they say that “during the pendency of the suits, the entire structure of the mosque was brought down in a calculated act of destroying a place of public worship. The Muslims have been wrongly deprived of a mosque which had been constructed well over 450 years ago.”
Again all this is pretty straightforward. Then the court says that “dividing the land will not subserve the interest of either of the parties or secure a lasting sense of peace and tranquillity.” Also that “allotment of land to the Muslims is necessary because though the Muslims were dispossessed upon the desecration of the mosque on 22/23 December 1949 which was ultimately destroyed on 6 December 1992. There was no abandonment of the mosque by the Muslims.”
More homilies follow: “This Court in the exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution must ensure that a wrong committed must be remedied. Justice would not prevail if the Court were to overlook the entitlement of the Muslims who have been deprived of the structure of the mosque through means which should not have been employed in a secular nation committed to the rule of law. The Constitution postulates the equality of all faiths. Tolerance and mutual co-existence nourish the secular commitment of our nation and its people.” etc etc.
And with all this in mind, the court then concludes that “on a balance of probabilities, the evidence in respect of the possessory claim of the Hindus to the composite whole of the disputed property stands on a better footing than the evidence adduced by the Muslims.”
Here I am lost. And my bafflement continues as I read further into the text. What is our Supreme Court saying? That desecration and vandalism must be rewarded because India is a secular country? Or am I getting it wrong? I am unable to figure out the logic and the jurisprudence that links the findings of the court and its conclusions.
India’s Supreme Court has taken the ultimatum made by LK Advani and other Hindutva leaders to Muslims 30 years ago — accept land elsewhere and get your mosque out of here else we will break it down — and legitimised it. But they have done so with kinder words.
The high-minded secular rhetoric of the judgement is dislocated from the majoritarian edge in its ruling. Homily alone has been given to the Muslim of India in exchange for justice. That is how it appears. Reading it in any other way does not make any sense to me.

November 11, 2019

India: Babri Judgment and Portents for Future | Ram Puniyani

Babri Judgment and Portents for Future
Ram Puniyani
The Supreme Court judgment on Babri Mosque-Ram Janmbhumi dispute gave the verdict that the whole land where the mosque stood from 1528 to 6th December 1992 be given to the ‘Hindu Side’, Ram Janmbhoomi Nyas, set up by VHP. Just to recall it was demolished in broad day light by the RSS combine led by Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharati on that day. As per verdict Government should make a trust which should supervise the temple construction and Muslims, Sunni Waqf Board, should be given five acres of land in a prominent site in Ayodhya. The SC conceded that the Namaz was being conducted at the site right till 1949 when the Ram Lalla idols were installed in the mosque in the middle of the night in a criminal way. The logic of SC is that from 1856 the place was associated with birth of Lord Ram. The evidence for this is not cited, the only basis here is that Hindus regarded it as the birth place of Lord Ram! The Court has held that the claim of Muslims on land of inner court yard is not amenable to adverse possession in favor of mosque. And that Muslims have not been able to present the evidence that they were in exclusive possession of inner Court yard, prior to 1857. As per the Court “Hindus have established a clear case of possessory title to the outside Courtyard, by virtue of long continuous and unimpeded worship at Ramchabutara and other aspects of religious significance.” And so the judgment!
Prelude to Judgment
There was a great mobilization of armed forces, police in anticipation of violence, either celebratory or due to protests against the judgment. Fortunately there has been no violence. One recalls that after Babri demolition in 1992, the violence was triggered in Mumbai by the celebratory procession led by Shiv Sena. While from ‘Hindu Side’ the likes of Lal Krishna advani, are feeling vindicated, the most Muslims have to reconcile to the Court verdict for more reasons than one.  As far as the nature of judgment, the one former judge put it in a bet possible way.  Retired Justice Ganguly put it “As a student of Constitution, it is difficult from me to accept it.”  Legal luminary Faizan Mustafa, Vice Chancellor of NALSAR Law University, states that “Ayodhya Judgment is a setback to evidence law.”
Seen in the long well documented history of the Babri Mosque it becomes clear that the judgment does not match to the known history of the Mosque and the happenings around it. While one concedes that this judgment will bring to a closure one long and painful chapter of contemporary Indian history. The hope is that other such mosques which have been on the demolition list of RSS combine will not be taken up for such a treatment.
Background
A brief recap of the dispute is in order to understand the mechanism of how the Babri Mosque issue was made controversial, how a huge mobilization was made to demolish it and what had been the political fallout of this well planned demolition, undertaken as a part of Hindu nationalist agenda. This criminal act of demolition was a move which has been built around the faith that it was a birth place of Lord Ram.
As such Babri mosque was built in 1528 by Babar’s General Mir Baqi. There was no dispute around it till 1855, when the clash took place between Bairagis and Muslims on the issue of Chabutara (raised platform) outside the Mosque. The British made a barricade between the inner Courtyard with three domed mosque and the outside area where many Hindu deities were located. The matter never came up during freedom struggle when whole nation was coming together to fight against the colonial forces.
The issue in current times begins on the night of 22-23 December 1949, when some elements forcibly broke the locks of the mosque and installed Ram Lalla idols in the mosque. Till around this time Namaz was being offered there. After installation of the idols in an illegal manner, fearing future trouble, the then Prime Minster Jawaharlal Nehru wrote to the UP Chief Minister G B Pant to get the idols vacated. The local District collector K K Nayyar did not comply and Pant did not take suitable action on this. Same Nayyar later went on to join the BJP’s previous avatar, Bharatiya Jansangh.
Decade of 1980s: Issue comes to fore
In 1980s the RSS Combine became more active and Ram Temple issue was brought to forefront. Reversal of SC judgment on Shah Bano gave it a boost. The locks of the mosque, which were put when the idols were installed in surreptitious manner in 1949, were opened under different political pressures. This was one of the biggest fallacies of current time which paved the way for further moves by RSS combine. VHP took up the campaign of construction of grand Ram Temple at the site, claiming that Lord Ram was precisely born at that spot. Through Ram Shila Pujan and other campaigns a faith was constructed all over. It was propagated that Lord Ram was born at that spot, there was a Ram Temple there, which was demolished by Babar to build the mosque. We can see right in current times as to how faith can be constructed for political for goals. This faith was constructed through political and social maneuvers.
Whether Ayodhya, where Lord is supposed to have been born is the same Ayodhya, where mosque is located is a matter of doubt. Topping it all even in current Ayodhya there are many a temples which put forward similar claims which have been built at the birth place of Lord Ram.
It was popularized that the Babri mosque is a symbol of the ‘foreign rule’ and of atrocities against Hindus by the Muslim rulers. This is further derivation of communal historiography which looks at the rule of Kings through the prism of religion. This historiography was introduced by British to pursue the policy of ‘Divide and Rule’. The Will of Babar to Humayun clearly spells out Babar’s policy towards Hindu temples. He advises to his son Humanyun not to break Hindu temples as majority of the subjects are Hindus.
As pointed out, that there was a temple at the spot, as such was part of the British introduced communal historiography. Mrs. A F Beevridge a British officer, while translating Babar’s memoirs had put a foot note that there may have been at least a part of temple on which the mosque was built. (From S. Gopal, Anatomy of Confrontation, Penguin) This is the core seed which later on was blown for making the full fledged claim of temple, temple of Lord Ram, Temple of birth place of Lord Ram was there. In a way demolition of this mosque in 1992 was the culmination of British policy where by Muslim Kings were selectively presented as temple destroyers. Incidentally many Muslims Kings also gave lots of donations to Hindu temples which have been undermined and unstated in the prevalent notions of History.
BJP Takes over Temple movement: Lal Krishna Advani
Duly, BJP took over the campaign from VHP and Advani started a Rath Yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya. The Rath Yatra was followed by communal violence en route. The polarization in the society started deepening the hatred against Muslims increased. One can say the polarization among the Hindus and Muslims was taken to higher level by the Ram Temple issue and the consequent Rath yatras and other programs undertaken by RSS and its affiliates. During Rath Yatra; Advani was arrested in Bihar by Lalu Prasad Yadav. Still many volunteers reached the Mosque and to prevent the damage to mosque; Mulayam Singh Yadav, the then Chief minister had to get the firing done, leading to tragic death of many. Mulayam Singh Yadav was presented as Mulla Mulayam, after this episode which was triggered as a culmination of Rath yatra.
Huge propaganda followed against the atrocities of Muslim kings. In the aftermath of Mandal commission implementation by VP Singh in 1990, the response to Ram Temple campaign started going up. Advani himself stated that the temple campaign is a political one. The faith of birth place of Lord Ram at Ayodhya where Babri Mosque stood is of recent origin, only few decades old. The plan was made to do Kar Seva (i.e. demolition of Babri Mosque) on 6th December 1992, under the guise of Kar Seva. Interestingly 6th December, the anniversary of Bhimrao Ambedkar, was chosen for the demolition.
Demolition and Violence
The UP Chief Minister Kalyan Singh of BJP; had given the written undertaking to protect the mosque.  Nearly three lakh Kar Sevaks assembled in Ayodhya to do Kar seva, at the same time nearly twenty thousand Kar Sevikas were also mobilized for cooking and cleaning. As Kar Seva began the police and other forces withdrew from the site and in a planned way the mosque was demolished in broad day light in five and a half hours. Congress has its own share of blame in this demolition as the then Prime Minster Narsimha Rao locked himself in Puja room as Mosque was being demolished. In a show of sorrow, shedding crocodile tears same Narsimha Rao, after the demolition woke up and stated that Mosque will be restored at the same place.
During demolition the cheering crowd led by Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharati gave the slogans, Ye to Keval Jhanki hai Kashi Mathura Baki hai (This is just the beginning, Kashi, Mathura will follow) A makeshift Ram Temple was built there illegally.
The crime of Babri demolition was investigated by Liberhan Commission, which opined that it was a planned act led by Advani and company. The guilty of Babri demolition have not been punished so far.
This demolition was followed by massive violence particularly in Mumbai and also in other cities like Surat and Bhopal. Over thousand innocent lives were lost, majority victims being Muslims. The BJP started becoming electorally stronger after this. It had two MPs in 1984 elections. As Yatras around the issue began, Babri demolished and violence started going up, BJP’s electoral power started zooming up, leading it to the seat of power in 1995 and in due course it become the largest political party in the country. That Ram was born at that spot became such a part of people’s faith that even the Allahabad High Court in its judgment in 2010, kept this in mind while dividing the land into three parts.
Since 1992 demolition in every subsequent election, Ram Temple has been the part of BJP’s electoral agenda. With BJP assuming power, its parent organization RSS also started expanding at double the speed. Ram Temple campaign changed the national priorities. The priorities of health, education, employment, dignity have been replaced by identity issues like Cow-Beef, Ghar Wapasi and love jihad.
Portents for Future
Where do we go from here? Will Muslims accept the five acres of land as compensation? There are some voices in the community to reject this offer, while some others are arguing that the land should be accepted and a College or Hospital should be built at that site. While one of the leaders of demolition squad Dr. Murli Manohar Joshi is saying that Kashi and Mathura should not be taken up, there are others in the RSS combine like Vinay Katiyar, who are invoking that now Kashi and Mathura issues should be brought to the fore. Can one pray and hope that such issues should not be raked up, as such history is mired in different confusions and there also incidents where Buddhist Viharas were demolished by Brahmnical reaction against Buddhism. Country can’t afford such agenda as the children dying in hospitals for lack of oxygen, youth not getting suitable employment and farmers worsening plight urges us to focus on the issues of present and not to create issues which retard the social progress and divide the society. The Constitutional guarantees of equality and status quo in matters of places of worship need to be followed. The whole episode of idol installations to Babri demolition to the accompanying communal violence and polarization should never be repeated is the optimistic hope. The country will adopt the path of communal harmony as represented by likes of Mahatma Gandhi and Maulana Abul Kalam and focus on issues of average people will be taken up in the right earnest.    

November 10, 2019

The Ayodhya verdict: Is this justice? I ask myself | Syeda Hameed

Hindustan Times

The Ayodhya verdict: Is this justice? I ask myself

Muslims should clearly, politely and unequivocally refuse the Supreme Court’s offer of five acres of land in Ayodhya

analysis Updated: Nov 10, 2019 05:41 IST
Syeda Hameed
Syeda Hameed

The Supreme Court of India has ruled that 2.77 acres, possibly the most disputed land in Indian history, will go to a trust to be formed by the government and five acres of land in Ayodhya will go to the Muslim party
The Supreme Court of India has ruled that 2.77 acres, possibly the most disputed land in Indian history, will go to a trust to be formed by the government and five acres of land in Ayodhya will go to the Muslim party(Sonu Mehta/HT)

It’s almost like it happened yesterday. I watched the masjid come down from my home in Jamia while the then Prime Minister watched it from 7, Race Course. Twenty seven years later it has come to a close with the unanimous judgment of five Supreme Court judges.
The 2.77 acres, possibly the most disputed land in Indian history, will go to a trust which will be formed by the government (within three months) and five acres of land somewhere in Ayodhya goes to the Muslim party.Is this justice? In its wording and in its spirit? I asked myself.
Snippets from media reports come back to me. The court has used the word illegal for the demolition of the Babri Masjid. I have a simple question to place before the honourable judges.
If breaking the Masjid was illegal, why has the 2.77 acres been gifted to the very elements who were party to this?The relief that has been offered to the aggrieved party does not suggest that there was any illegality in the demolition of the masjid.
Some other thoughts follow this question.
There were two original Hindu parties (to the case): the Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla Virajman. Later, a third entity entered the fray, the Ram Janambhoomi Nyas, which now is the paramount player. Will it now be dominant party of the trust and gain control of the huge sums that have been gathered for this cause from India and around the world?
The ASI’s main report, which was signed by all those who framed it, stated that no temple was found beneath the masjid. At the end of the report, there was an unsigned epilogue. It stated that the structure beneath did not look Islamic. Has the court relied on the unsigned epilogue rather than on the signed report?
What about the optics of this judgement? Does it appear as if a majoritarian judgement was delivered within a majoritarian ethos to please the majority? Does it set a precedent? We have an ancient history when entire cities have been built on the ruins of other cities. (Delhi was razed and rebuilt seven times). What about Kashi? Mathura? What about thousands of religious places which are on the demolition list?

Should relief follow from the findings or should it be contrary to the findings? Can it be said in all fairness that the consequence of what the court described as illegality is that the “aggressor” party has got what it wanted.
To quote Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, “Jo hona ttha woh ho chuka” (Whatever was supposed to happen, has happened). For Muslims, the question I ask myself in the words of Allama Iqbal is: “What should we do now? What should we not do?”
There has been unprecedented security across the country as though fearing that Muslims will come out in protest from every gully and mohalla of the country. Or that Hindus will emerge with bands and banners from all corners. That’s very unlikely. That should not happen. I cannot speak for the Hindus but for Muslims. I say with humility to my co-religionists that we have no power, no agency, no spaces left for protest. Those spaces are fast disappearing for all who believe in resisting the establishment. I don’t want to see innocent blood spilling on the streets, because it is only the poor and wretched who are used by the powerful to create a divisions and violence.
There is one talisman for Muslims which has been given by none other than their sole guides, the Koran and the Prophet. They should clearly, politely and unequivocally refuse the offer of five acres of land in Ayodhya. Then they should say to the powers that be: “Since you have in one voice given the judgment that the demolition and placement of idols was illegal then don’t give us substitutes like pieces of land; we reject such offers. In the spirit of your judgment, just give us one assurance that this will never happen again.”
Syeda Hameed is a writer and president of the Muslim Womens Forum

India: The political reconfiguration of Hinduism, where political rather than spiritual forces now represent it, is now complete.


Ram’s political triumph
 
Is it just possible that instead of a triumphal monument to Ram’s political glory — for this is all that the temple will be under present circumstances — can we build something genuinely congruent with Ram’s greatness?
Written by Pratap Bhanu Mehta |Updated: November 10, 2019

India: What the Supreme Court's Ayodhya Judgment Means for the Future of the Republic | Siddharth Varadarajan

The Wire

What the Supreme Court's Ayodhya Judgment Means for the Future of the Republic 
The main beneficiaries of the Supreme Court's verdict on Saturday are organically linked to the main accused in the crime of demolishing the mosque. And that's not good for India.

by Siddharth Varadarajan

https://thewire.in/communalism/supreme-court-ayodhya-babri-masjid-ram-janambhoomi


May 24, 2019

India: Meghalaya High Court Division Bench overrules Hindu Country judgment

"Legally flawed, superfluous": Meghalaya High Court Division Bench overrules Hindu Country judgment

Murali Krishnan May 24 2019  

A Division Bench of Meghalaya High Court has overruled the controversial judgment of a single judge which had stated that India should have been declared a Hindu country during the Partition.
A Bench of Chief Justice Mohammad Yaqoob Mir and Justice HS Thangkhiew ruled that the judgment of Justice SR Sen is legally flawed and is inconsistent with the constitutional principles. The observations made and directions passed in the judgment are totally superfluous, the Division Bench held.
Therefore it set aside the judgment in its entirety.
“After bestowing our thoughtful consideration to the entire gamut of the matter we have reached to a firm conclusion that the judgment impugned dated 10.12.2018 is legally flawed and is in-consistent with the constitutional principles, the observations made and directions passed therein are totally superfluous, therefore, is set aside in its entirety, as such shall be non est.”
On December 10 last year, Justice Sen in his controversial judgment had urged the Prime Minister, Home Minister, Law Minister and the MPs to enact laws to allow the Hindus, Sikhs, Jains, Buddhist, Parsis, Christians, Khasis, Jaintias and Garos who have come from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan to live in India and to be given citizenship.
The judgment, which was delivered in a case pertaining to domicile certificate, had also stated that India should have been declared a Hindu country during the Partition, though it chose to remain a secular nation. It stated,
“Pakistan declared themselves as an Islamic country and India since was divided on the basis of religion should have also been declared as a Hindu country but it remained as a secular country”
The judgment had caused outrage and Justice Sen had to subsequently issue a clarificatory statement asserting that “I am not a religious fanatic rather I respect all the religions because to me God is one.”
An appeal was filed against the same in the Supreme Court. A PIL filed against the same is still pending before the Supreme Court.
The High Court, however, noted in its judgment that pendency of SLP in Supreme Court will not bar the Division Bench from deciding the instant appeal.
“Pendency of SLP with aforesaid prayer in our humble opinion will not operate as a bar for deciding the instant appeal as is also submitted by learned counsel for the parties, more so Hon‟ble Judge against whom aforesaid relief has been sought on reaching superannuation has retired.”

April 28, 2019

Life comes cheap in India: Court orders compensation for Bilkis Bano say Rs 24500 per month x 17 years

The long fight: Bilkis Bano gets a measure of compensation

April 27, 2019, 2:01 am IST in TOI Editorials | Edit Page, India | TOI
What happened to Bilkis Bano in Gujarat in March 2002 was horrific. Her story since then has been difficult but heroic, her triumphs inspirational. Against high odds, including illiteracy and state hostility, she won the convictions of men who had gang-raped her and murdered her family as well as of those who tried to bury her case illegally. Further, this Tuesday the Supreme Court granted her one of the largest compensations to a victim of sexual assault and rape in India, Rs 50 lakh.
This is of course in sharp contrast to the Rs 5 lakh that had been offered to her by the Gujarat government. Compensating victims is an important component of criminal justice. As Bilkis said, what the apex court did was acknowledge the pain that she had endured for 17 years. It sent the clear signal that the state cannot be allowed to flagrantly violate a citizen’s rights but must protect them, which was important to her as she never lost faith in the Constitution and the justice system.
The daughter with whom Bilkis was pregnant when she was gang-raped, wants to be a lawyer. By word and example, her husband advises that men should stand by women. And this week, she also cast her vote for the first time since 2002. In her, the horrific Gujarat riots have forged an iron spirit that will inspire other embattled women to fight for justice, especially when it looks out of reach.

April 25, 2019

India: After 17 years, rape survivor Bilkis Bano got justice. A story of courage and resilience

Huffington Post - India 25/04/2019
 
'My Daughter Will Be A Lawyer,' Says Bilkis Bano After Historic Compensation
Bilkis Bano, who was gang raped during the 2002 Gujarat riots, never gave up on seeking justice.
NEW DELHI — Seventeen years after she was gang raped during the Gujarat riots in 2002, Bilkis Bano thanked the Supreme Court for ordering the state government to pay her compensation worth Rs. 50 lakh — the highest compensation given to a rape survivor in India.
Addressing a press conference in New Delhi on Wednesday, Bilkis said, “The Supreme Court has acknowledged the pain that I have endured for 17 years. That is important to me.”
“This was a long fight but I have never lost faith in the Constitution and the justice system,” she said.  [ . . . ]

https://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/my-daughter-will-be-a-lawyer-says-bilkis-bano-after-historic-compensation_in_5cc0a7bee4b01b6b3efbe5a2https://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/my-daughter-will-be-a-lawyer-says-bilkis-bano-after-historic-compensation_in_5cc0a7bee4b01b6b3efbe5a2