Ayodhya Verdict: India shows maturity

By: Subhadeep Bhattacharjee

Amidst all the fear and apprehension Indian society has shown signs of maturity on the verdict of the Ayodhya title suit. For once majority of the politicians acted statesmanly over the issue and helped in preserving peace and tranquillity in the nation. Barring a few irresponsible like Mulayam Singh Yadav who wanted to play the vote bank politics by trying to appease the minorities our neta brigade behaved responsibly over the issue. There was wide spread speculations that the verdict would incite communal tension around the country like it had done post demolition of the Babri masjid in 1992.

The three judge bench of the Allahabad High Court comprising Justice DV Sharma, SU Khan and Sudhir Agarwal delivered the best possible judgement in the case which has been going on for over 60 years. All the three parties to the conflict the Sunni Wakf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas have got their share of the disputed structure. Now as the litigants prepare for further dual in the Supreme Court, peace prevails in the nation as of now.

There are some groups and politicians who are citing this as 2-1 verdict in favour of the Hindus and claim that the Muslims have been betrayed by the court. But what judgement would have been fair to the Muslims? Are they advocating for a complete hold of the disputed structure by a single group? Why should than Muslims hold the structure and not the Hindus? Wouldn’t such a decision have aroused communal tension in the nation accounting for thousands of lives?

In this historic judgement the judges had to consider many things- religious sentiments of the people, historical facts and the findings by the ASI. Agreed that demolishing a religious structure wasn’t something worth celebration but the same religious structure was built on a seventh century temple after having demolished it. The same place which is sacrad to millions of Hindus who consider it as the birth place of Lord Ram. True there are no historical evidence of this claim but when was religion based on evidence, isn’t it pure faith?

The disputed structure was known as Masjid-e-Janmasthan in popular culture which supports that argument that Hindus for centuries had celebrated it as the birth place of Ram. Nobody can deny that thousands of Hindu temples were destroyed across North India during the Mughal rule. Aurangzeb alone was thought to have destroyed more that ten thousand temples during his rule. Can these historical facts be denied in the name of pseudo secularism?

It is time we accept the verdict that has been given by the court and help restore peace and harmony between the two communities. Let there be a second mosque be built on the plot of land that will be allotted to the Sunni Wakf Board and let there be a Ram Mandir adjacent to that and both communities show harmony towards each other. The politicians especially ones like Mulayam who wants to rebuild his career making such inflammatory comments should be condemned by one and all.