When the existence of supreme Hindu Lord Rama, was questioned in the courtroom. Good or Bad of Democracy? |You Decide

Representation of Ayodhaya’s Rama Temple

India being a Hindu majority, unlike many other countries never called itself a Hindu Rashtra (Nation). This is obviously so great of Indian constitution that has no religious identity of its own, this was done so that people of other faiths in India feel safe and secured under a non-religious constitution. This sets India different in many ways like we’ve seen and are well aware of atrocities being faced by many religious minorities in the neighbouring Islamic countries of India. Every year thousands of non-muslims from countries like Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh are migrating to India for shelter and safety. Recently on 26th july 2020, 11 people of Sikh community from Afghanistan were granted visas and safely brought to the New Delhi. These people had faced the recent terrorism against Sikhs and Hindus of Afghanistan where many of them were slaughtered, abducted and raped by the talibani terror groups. These men, women and children feel lucky and like home India. The Sikh refugee who was priest to a Gurudwara (Sikh temple) who was abducted by the talibanis and later rescued by the Afghan Government in his recent interview on arrival said “India is home, India is Mother, there’s no other country like India”.

This was the sole reason that government of India had formed Citizen Amendment Act (CAA) to ensure that minorities in Islamic constitution of Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Bangladesh gets a safe house in India. The CAA grants Indian citizenship to all minorities i.e. Sikhs, Hindus, Christians, Zoroastrians, Parses, Jains, Buddhists and all other non-muslims facing inhumane atrocities in these three muslim majority nations.

In the same India that has room for all religions, a country that welcomes all whole heartedly and lends a helping hand. This country in Asian subcontinent is known for its good deeds of Humanity. India being Hindu majority never showed any form of biases in the case of Ram Janam Bhoomi (Birth Place of Lord Ram) case. Like its neighbours, India could’ve used its religious majority might to wind up the case decades earlier but unlike any other nation India had to wait for almost 500 years for reconstructing once demolished Ram Temple. It’s just like questioning the existence of Jerusalem and Jesus, Mecca and Madina.

Lord Ram who is believed to be the supreme avatar of Hindu God Vishnu was born in the capital of Ayodhaya in the solar dynasty that existed thousands of years before any other civilisation on the planet.

History of the Dispute

The land on which the Babri mosque was built in 1528 is the ‘RamJanmabhoomi’ (birthplace of the god-king Rama). But, Mir Baqi, one of Mughal king Babur’s generals, is said to have destroyed a pre-existing temple of Rama and built a mosque called Babri Masjid (Babur’s mosque) at the site.

The Babri Mosque was destroyed during a political rally which turned into a riot on 6 December 1992.

A subsequent land title case was lodged in Allahabad High Court, the verdict of which was pronounced on 30 September 2010. In the landmark hearing, the three judges of The Allahabad High Court ruled that the 2.77 acres (1.12 ha) of Ayodhya land be divided into 3 parts, with 1/3 going to the Ram Lamlash or Infant Rama represented by the Hindu Maha Sabha for the construction of the Ram temple, 1/3 going to the Islamic Sunni Waqf Board and the remaining 1/3 going to a Hindu religious denomination Nirmohi Akhara. While the three-judge bench was not unanimous that the disputed structure was constructed after demolition of a temple, it did agree that a temple or a temple structure predated the mosque at the same site.

The excavations by the Archaeological Survey of India were heavily used as evidence by the court that the predating structure was a massive Hindu religious building.

The disputed holy site of Ayodhya in northern India should be given to Hindus who want a temple built there, the country’s Supreme Court has ruled.

Supreme Court’s verdict

The case, which has been bitterly contested for decades by Hindus and Muslims, centres on the ownership of the land in Uttar Pradesh state. Muslims would get another plot of land to construct a mosque, the court said. Many Hindus believe the site is the birthplace of one of their most revered deity, The Lord Ram.

Court’s reason for verdict

In the unanimous verdict, the court said that a report by the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) provided evidence that the remains of a building “that was not Islamic” was beneath the structure of the demolished Babri mosque.

The court said that, given all the evidence presented, it had determined that the disputed land should be given to Hindus for a temple to Lord Ram, while Muslims would be given land elsewhere to construct a mosque.

It then directed the federal government to set up a trust to manage and oversee the construction of the temple.

Categories: India

Tagged as: ,