Headlines

TRACKING BABRI CASE: Akhara Parishad divided?

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 19 January 2011 | Posted in , , ,

IMO News Service

In a meeting of Akhil Bhartiya Akhara Parishad (ABAP) held recently at Allahabd, the participants allayed misconceptions regarding the controversy surrounding the election of its president. In a way this meeting was convened to cause a dent into the clout of the chief of Nirmohi Akhara Sant Mahant Gyndas, one of the petitioners in Babri Masjid case. The rich sect owns many temples and mutts in Uttar Pradesh, Uttarakhand, Madhya Pradesh, Rajasthan, Gujarat and Bihar. Members of the sect are expected to lead a simple and austere life of celibacy and accept Rama as their presiding God.

The main contention between those attending the meeting and the supporters of Mahant Gyandas is that, who the reigning president of the Parishad is? It is said that a group of leaders of Akharas have elected Mahanat Balwant Singh of Nirmal Akhara as president and Shankaranand Saraswati of Anand Akhara as the secretary on 25 November while sacking Mahant Gyandas from its premiership. It seems that a faction of this federation of 14 Hindu Akharas having leaning with the VHP was not happy with the latter in the aftermath of the Allahabad High Court verdict since he was negotiating with one of the Muslim petitioners for an out of court settlement.

It should be noted that Nirmohi Akhara, a group of Hindu divinity founded in 1720 has been fighting a legal case since 1885 when its chief Mahant Raghubar Ram filed a prayer with the British court for construction of temple on Ram Chabutra in the Babri Masjid courtyard, which was subsequently denied. Exactly after one hundred years, the Akhara approached the court again along with other contenders. In 1989, three parties Nirmohi Akhada, the Sunni Waqf Board representing Muslim community and Ram Janam Bhoomi Samiti, representing the Hindu community, filed the case in Allahabad High Court. In one of the most controversial judgments of India history, the Lucknow bench of the high court parceled out one third of the land to each of these.

Mahant Gyandas does not subscribe to the involvement of the VHP on the Babri Masjid issue and as a matter of fact he has been trying to come out with some formula along with Hashim Ansari for an out of court settlement towards execution of the high court order.

Babri Masjid case faces a new twist: Buddhists sought intervention in Supreme Court

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 07 January 2011 | Posted in , , ,



Claim has been made in a special writ petition in the apex court of the country that the disputed site was a Buddh Vihar, therefore, it should be handed over to Buddhists and none else.

President of the Buddh Education Foundation and the Confederation of All India Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Organisations Dr Udit Raj has filed this petition in response to the verdict of Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court. It is said in the prayer that Indian Buddhists challenge the judgment and its legality. Not only the disputed site but the entire place was a Buddhist seminary.

On this occasion former central minister and the leader of Bhartiya Janshakti Party Sanghpriya Guatam has appealed for support on this issue. Guatam recalled, “Justice Aggarwal had said that the Kasuati stone pillars are similar to Buddhists pillars of Varanasi. Justice S.U Khan referred in his judgment that the British archaeologist mentioned that the pillars used in the construction of Babri Masjid were like Kasauti stone pillars he saw in Varanasi”.

He is, therefore, of the opinion that it is very possible that there could have been a Buddhist shrine on the site or around where the mosque was erected and some of its debris was used in that act. Raj told that Archaeological Survey of India informed in 2003 to the Allahabad High Court that it has found a circular place of worship beneath the disputed site and the court had instructed the ASI to undertake some more investigation in that regard.

Raj commented that nothing sort of that had been undertaken till date. There is a strong possibility that it was a Buddhist Math. Since the Masjid was constructed by using remnants of a Buddhist shrine so it should be given to the Buddhist community.

बाबरी मस्जिद विवादस्पद स्थल पर बौद्धों ने दायर की याचिका

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | | Posted in , ,


नई दिल्ली। सुप्रीम कोर्ट में दायर एक विशेष अनुमति याचिका में दावा किया गया है कि बाबरी मस्जिद के स्थान पर एक बौद्ध विहार मौजूद था और इसलिए अयोध्या के विवादास्पद स्थल को इस धर्म के मतावलंबियों को दे दिया जाना चाहिए।

बौद्ध एजुकेशन फाउंडेशन और अखिल भारतीय अनुसूचित जाति, अनुसूचित जनजाति संगठनों के संघ के अध्यक्ष उदित राज ने अयोध्या के स्वामित्व को लेकर इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट की लखनऊ पीठ के फैसले के जवाब में कल यह याचिका दायर की। राज ने एक संवाददाता सम्मेलन में यह जानकारी देते हुए कहा, 'भारत में रह रहे बौद्ध फैसले की वैधता और संवैधानिकता को चुनौती देते हैं। न केवल विवादित स्थल बल्कि बाबरी मस्जिद के निर्माण से पहले यह पूरा स्थल एक बौद्ध विहार था।'

इस मौके पर राज के साथ उपस्थित पूर्व केंद्रीय मंत्री और भारतीय जनशक्ति पार्टी के नेता संघप्रिय गौतम ने इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट के फैसले का हवाला देते हुए इस तर्क का समर्थन करने का आग्रह किया।

गौतम ने कहा, 'न्यायमूर्ति सुधीर अग्रवाल ने कहा कि विवादित स्थल के कसौटी स्तंभ वाराणसी में मौजूद बौद्ध स्तंभों के समान हैं। न्यायमूर्ति एस यू खान ने कहा कि ब्रिटिश पुराविद कारनेजी ने कहा था कि मस्जिद के निर्माण में इस्तेमाल किए गए कसौटी स्तंभ उन बौद्ध स्तंभों के समान हैं जिन्हें उन्होंने वाराणसी में देखा है।'

उन्होंने कहा, 'इसलिए यह संभव है कि उस स्थल पर या उसके आस पास किसी बौद्ध धार्मिक स्थल के अवशेष रहे हों जहां मस्जिद का निर्माण किया गया था और इसकी कुछ सामग्री का इस्तेमाल मस्जिद के निर्माण में किया गया हो।' राज ने कहा कि अपनी रिपोर्ट में भारतीय पुरातत्व सर्वे ने 2003 में कहा था कि सर्वे ने विवादित स्थल के नीचे एक गोलाकार पूजास्थल पाया जिसके बाद इलाहाबाद हाईकोर्ट ने उससे और सबूत जुटाने को कहा था।

राज ने कहा, 'अब तक ऐसा नहीं किया गया है। इस बात की सर्वाधिक संभावना है कि यह बौद्धों का मठ है। मस्जिद का निर्माण बौद्ध विहार के अवशेषों पर किया गया है और इसलिए इसे बौद्धों को दिया जाना चाहिए।'

उन्होंने कहा कि भारतीय पुरातत्व सर्वे ने कहा है कि विशालकाय संरचना के साथ स्तंभों के आधार उन अवशेषों का संकेत देते हैं जो उत्तर भारत के मंदिरों की खास पहचान हैं।

Cracks widen in Ramjanmsthan movement

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 01 January 2011 | Posted in , , , ,

IMO News Service

Only the legal community would suggest how an issue which is sub judice could be so lavishly interceded by unrelated claimants while making nonsensical pleading as regards Babri Masjid title suit. However, the recent news of cracks in the Ramjanmsthan movement has been reconfirmed by constant assertions of the reverend seers of Hindu community who see no role of Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) as regards construction of a ‘grand’ Ramjanm temple on the disputed site of Babri Masjid. Ramalay Nyas floated by the four Shankaracharyas is a new contender in the list of many ‘close friends’ of child Ramlala. The said trust is prepared to share the historic land neither with the VHP nor Nirmohi Akhara.

Dwarka Peeth Shankaracharya Swaroopanand Saraswati has said to reporters at Nagpur, “The land is in the Central government’s possession. So, we will request them to hand it over to the Nyas for building a grand temple”. Explaining specialty of their proposed model the seer commented “The VHP wants to erect a temple of Ram in human form. We want to construct a temple of Ram in his godly avatar.”

According to him, the VHP is not a legal party to the dispute and Nirmohi Akhara’s plaint has been time-barred by the court. However, he did not specify how his own trust would be a legal plaint itself.

He took altogether a bizarre stand on the issue that the “VHP has mistaken by demolishing the structure that was never a mosque, which has led many to believe that there was a mosque there. The VHP, in fact, ended up demolishing what was originally a temple.”

While expressing difficulties of existence of two places of different denominations side by side, as the verdict of Allahabad high court came out with, he proposed to build a grand temple in true Aryan style of architecture which will draw the design not from any Indian temple but from the Angkor Vat in Combodia.

Earlier, the chief of Nirmohi Akhara Sant Gynadas declared about severing of his relation with the VHP, who is presently negotiating with Hashim Ansari, the oldest litigant of Babri Masjid issue for some amicable solution of the Ayodhya dispute.

The senior leader of RSS Ram Madhav commented on the viewpoint of Shankracharya in these words, “We have nothing to say about what Shankracharyaji has said. The temple dispute was between some parties like Ram Janambhumi Nyas, Nirmohi Akhara and Sunni Wakf Board. Let them react to it. Our stand is clear. We want a grand temple on the entire undivided land.”

Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind to back Sunni Central Wakf Board on Ayodhya judgement

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 31 December 2010 | Posted in ,

IMO News Service

The national executive of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind (JUH) on December 30, 2010, unanimously resolved to offer support to the Sunni Central Wakf Board in fighting the Ayodhya case. The Wakf Board has already moved the Supreme Court against the Allahabad High Court's judgment in the title suits.

This is significant in view of the divergent opinions expressed after the verdict by Maulana Mehmood Madani, a key member of JUH. Mr. Madani, who has since taken over as its general secretary, had advised the Muslim community to accept the court verdict and draw up a settlement with the Hindu parties to the dispute. A JUH spokesperson said the organisation's decision to back the Wakf Board was taken after assessing the report of an expert committee, which was in turn advised by a panel of lawyers.

Babri Verdict: Sunni Wakf Board moves to Supreme Court

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 15 December 2010 | Posted in , ,

IMO News Service

The Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Wakf Board moved on 14th December the apex court on Babri Masjid-Ramjanmbhoomi title suit, well within the 90 days’ time limit for a corrective petition, pleading that the judgment of Lucknow bench of the Allahabad High Court as passed on 30 September this year was based on faith rather than on legal evidence. The Board’s contention is that it is incumbent upon it to approach the Supreme Court on the ground that “the High Court verdict has committed an error in holding that the building was at the place of birth of Ram”.


Akhil Bharat Hindu Mahasabha was the first petitioner moving to the apex court in the case followed by Jamiatul Ulama and now one of the original contenders of the title suit Sunni Wakf Board has knocked the door highest judiciary in the final stage of the litigation. Mahasabha filed a caveat for preempting any ex parte order on the Ayodhya title suit whereas the Jamiat has filed a prayer for intervention in this regard.


The Board submits that the Lucknow bench solely bases its finding on a flight of faith rather than documentary evidence to show that Ram was born exactly under the central dome of the mosque. Zafaryab Jilani who appeared for the Board in the high court holds on the occasion, “To give prominence to the factor of belief and faith over the Indian Evidence Act, a parliamentary statute, is a violation by itself.”


The petition makes the point that the judgment violates some of the fundamental principles enshrined in the Constitution such as freedom to practice religion by choice under its articles 25 and 26. The move of the Sunni Wakf Board derives its strength from the fact that record placed by Nirmohi Akhara proves that till 1941 Hindus believed that Ram Chabootra was the birth place and not the mosque itself.


Perhaps other parties of the dispute and All India Muslim Personal Law Board will also move the Supreme Court shortly, before the 90 days’ time limit expires on 29th instant.


BABRI MASJID DISPUTE: Let the Court decide

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 17 September 2010 | Posted in ,

By M Naushad Ansari

The article ‘Will HC verdict on title suits decide Ayodhya dispute? (Times of India, Sept 13) does not make any rational sense. The author’s claim that there had been a dispute about the Babri Masjid structure, right from 1857 or before, is misleading, false and baseless. Indeed, the judicial record of that more than a hundred year old case bears testimony to the fact that the bone of contention was a chabootra said to be Ramjanambhoomi, which lies in the outer enclosure, 95 paces away from demolished Babri Masjid site. The claim of some Hindus for building a small Rama temple on that chabootra was rejected in 1885-86 by lower and higher courts comprising two Hindu and one Christian judges. Before 1949, in fact, not a single Hindu leader claimed that the Babri Masjid was the location of Rams's birth!All the records of the said judicial case are before the special bench of the Allahabad High Court.

In fact, the Archaeological Survey of India (A.S.I.) has concluded that a ‘temple to mark his (Ram's) birthplace was not built on the site of Babri Masjid.’ Significantly, A.S.I. found no trace of human habitation in Ayodhya earlier than the 6th Century BC, thus indirectly delinking modern Ayodhya with Shri Rama Chandraji of the Ramayana. Besides, there are over a dozen temples in Ayodhya that are claimed to be the true birthsite of Rama.

As for the ‘unused’ Masjid’ it was functional right upto the night of 22-23 December, 1949. If it remained unused since then till now, this was on account of the fact that first a dispute was created and then a status quo order was obtained and the Muslims respected the order. How does respect for the law erode or dilute Muslims’ legal rights?

In the past, the State has played a significant role in supporting communalism; yet now, the State must demonstrate its firm commitment to secularism by not bowing down to any communal forces while implementing verdict of the court. In refusing to abide by the court's verdict, the communalists are undermining the very foundations of India's secularism. In a democratic society we have all to accept the judicial verdict.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Presented here is the article in The Times of India

Will Sept 24 Babri verdict settle dispute?

By Dhananjay Mahapatra

Built in 1528 by Mir Baqi and known till the 1940s as Masjid-i-Janmasthan, the Babri Masjid- Ramjanambhoomi disputed structure was demolished by a marauding mob on December 6, 1992. The sound of its loud crash, etched in the memory of many, could potentially reverberate again after the Allahabad high court decides the title suits filed by both Hindus and Muslims claiming ownership over the land on which the structure once stood.

Babri Masjid was also known for its acoustics. Graham Pickford, who was an architect for Lord William Bentick (1828-1833), had said, "A whisper from the Babri Masjid Mihrab could be heard at the other end, 100 feet away, and throughout the length and breadth of the central court." It had a miracle well, whose water was revered both by Hindus and Muslims for its cool sweetness and for its disease curing powers, all recorded in the District Gazetteer of Faizabad (DGF).

The Mutiny of 1857 probably changed it all. The DGF says, "Up to this time (1855), both Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building. But since the Mutiny (1857), an outer enclosure has been put up in front of the Masjid and the Hindus, forbidden access to the inner yard, make the offering on a platform (chabootra), which they have raised in the outer one."

The other turning point was the night of December 22-23, 1949. As per the FIR lodged by sub-inspector Ram Dube of Ayodhya police station, a group of 50-60 people stealthily placed the idols of Ram and Sita in the central dome of the Masjid at night. A furious Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru asked Uttar Pradesh chief minister G B Pant to take steps to immediately remove the idols. But district magistrate K K Nair, fearing retaliation from Hindus, pleaded inability to carry out the orders. The later sequence of events are vividly projected by the Supreme Court in its judgment in Ismail Faruqui vs Union of India [1994 SCC (6) 360]. In 1950, two suits were filed by some Hindus; in one of these suits, in January 1950, the trial court passed interim orders whereby the idols remained at the place where they were installed in December 1949. The main premises were locked, not allowing devotees inside.

The high court confirmed the interim order in 1955. If Nirmohi Akhara filed a suit claiming title over the disputed structure in 1959, the Sunni Central Wakf Board followed suit in 1961. In 1989, another title suit was filed. On February 1, 1986, a decision by the Rajiv Gandhi government and order by the district magistrate saw the locks opened and the place, hitherto permitted for entry to a priest once a year for an yearly puja, was thrown open to devotees.

What followed in quick succession before the 1992 demolition of the disputed structure were a series of breaches of status quo orders by the high court and solemn assurances by Uttar Pradesh government and its chief minister Kalyan Singh to protect the structure.

The central government, through an ordinance that was later converted into the "Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993", took over the entire area, including the spot where the disputed structure once stood. The entire land measured 67.703 acres in village Kot Ramchandra in Faizabad.

The Supreme Court upheld the acquisition, which probably helped in calming the volatile situation prevailing in Ayodhya but its splinters engulfed India through catastrophic riots in Mumbai and other places altering
the sensitive equation between the two communities. But it struck down Section 4(3) of the act.

The SC gave reasons allowing the adjudication of title suits. Very convincing ones given the situation then. But what it said in epilogue was apt — courts can decide a dispute but cannot solve a problem. The high court may give its verdict in favour of the Hindus or Muslims. But will there be a winner? Chances are that either way it may prove dangerous.

The Supreme Court had rightly said, "This is a matter suited essentially to resolution by negotiations which does not end in a winner and a loser while adjudication leads to that end. It is in the national interest that there is no loser at the end of the process adopted for resolution of the dispute so that the final outcome does not leave behind any rancour in anyone."

As the high court is scheduled to give its verdict on September 24, it is time for all of us and the government to think on these last words of the Supreme Court in the Faruqui judgment: "Unless a solution is found which leaves everyone happy, that cannot be the beginning for continued harmony between 'we the people of India'.

(Courtesy: The Times of India)

Indian Muslim News - BABRI MASJID

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 06 December 2009 | Posted in ,

Babri Masjid demolition: 17 Years after & Justice still eludes US-based advocacy group Indian Muslim Council-USA demands immediate civil and criminal action against all accused in the Liberhan Report By Danish Ahmad Khan Indian Muslim Council-USA (http://www.imc-usa.org), an advocacy group dedicated towards safeguarding India's pluralist and tolerant ethos, has demanded that the Indian government should bring to justice the accused who are involved in the demolition of the 16th century Babri Mosque in the city of Ayodhya in the State of Uttar Pradesh, as identified in the Report of the Liberhan Ayodhya Commission of Inquiry that was released recently. Indian Muslim Council-USA has further demanded that the Indian government honor the promise given by the former Prime Minister Narasimha Rao to re-build the mosque on its original site. In a press release, Dr. Hyder Khan, National Vice President of IMC-USA said, "I am hopeful that current leadership in India will take moral and bold decisions to check the criminalization of politics through regional tribunals as proposed by the Liberhan Commission and not allow the Hindutva extremist groups propagate intolerant agenda and sectarianism." "The Liberhan report is another testimony to the sad state of communal affairs in India and a clear verdict on deep seated resistance towards speaking the truth" said Rasheed Ahmed National President of IMC-USA. Ahmed further stated that "It took 17 years to document the two obvious facts, first that the demolition of the Babri Masjid was a premeditated criminal act by Hindutva leaders and second that BJP is simply a means for RSS to impose fascist regime in India," Dr. Hyder Khan said and added, "Liberhan Commission named 68 individuals as the leading planners and participants directly or indirectly involved in the destruction of the Babri Mosque. Most of the perpetrators listed in the Commission report are associated with Hindutva-fascist groups such as the RSS, VHP and Bajrang Dal, all of whom are closely allied with the political Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP). The BJP, in alliance with several other parties, was in power from 1998 to 2004. These religious extremist groups garner significant support from Non-Resident Indians living in the United States." It may be recalled that on December 6, 1992 defying the orders of the Supreme Court of India and their own promise to the nation, the Hindutva fascist forces demolished the historic Babri Mosque in northern Indian state of Uttar Pradesh. This 16th century Muslim place of worship was destroyed by a frenzied mob of karsevaks in spite of assurances from the Hindutva leaders who spearheaded the Babri Masjid demolition campaign such as Atal Behari Vajpayee, Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharati, Sadhavi Rithambhara and several others and the state administration officials that only symbolic prayers will be performed and that the structure of the Babri Mosque will be safe. The Liberhan Commission appointed by the Indian government to investigate the destruction of the Babri Mosque submitted the report earlier this year that took more than 16 years of proceedings and recording statements of politicians, bureaucrats and police officials. Led by Indian Supreme Court Judge M S Liberhan, the commission identified key individuals and organizations who played a direct role in planning what the commission termed as a "joint common enterprise" that lead to the destruction of the Babri Mosque. Now even after 17 years ever since the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the Indian government is yet to take any credible action against the accused for their criminal action in inciting and perpetrating the ultimate demolition of the Babri Masjid. Not only this, the Liberhan Commission report has chosen not to implicate the then Prime Minister of the Congress Party PV Narasimha Rao as one of the foremost accomplice in the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Congress Party leader Makhan Lal Fotedar recently said in an interview to a prominent TV channel that when the news of the Babri Masjid demolition broke, the then President of India Dr. Shanker Dayal Sharma wept like a child as being in a largely ceremonial post he could do little to apply pressure on the officials and help stop the criminal demolition of the Babri Masjid. Clearly, the President was pained at seeing the secular ethos of our great nation lie in tatters with the demolition of the Babri Masjid. Makhan Lal Fotedar also said that the then Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao had called the then Governor of Uttar Pradesh and asked him not to take any action against the then Chief Minister Kalyan Singh of the rightist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), who was at the helm of affairs when the Babri Masjid was being demolished. The Liberhan Commission has named Kalyan Singh as one of the main accused in the demolition of the Babri Masjid. It is therefore not surprising that the Prime Minister of the so-called secular India’s principal ruling party Congress Party acted as a stooge of the Hindu fanatic organization Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). Rao is therefore also being considered as one of the main accused in the demolition of the Babri Masjid even though the Liberhan Commission Report has chosen not to indict him at all. Though Makhan Lal Fotedar in his interview said that for the crimes of the Hindu fanatics or even the then Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao, the entire Congress Party cannot be held responsible for the demolition of the Babri Masjid. But then, isn’t it surprising indeed that not a single minister in the Narasimha Rao-led ministry resigned or even offered to resign as a token mark of protest. Worse still, was the deafening silence of the Muslim ministers in the Narasimha Rao-led ministry or even Muslim members of parliament (MP), who also chose to ignore the demolition of the Babri Masjid as if nothing significant has happened. By saying this, does Makhan Lal Fotedar mean to say that if something of horrendous nature ever happens now then the present Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh should be solely held responsible for it and not the entire Congress Party? The Muslims of India are still feeling aggrieved at the criminal destruction of the Babri Masjid and only hope that the Indian Government, which is now being ruled by the Congress arty-led UPA coalition, should immediately initiate criminal and civil action against all accused in the Liberhan Report and that all politicians, individuals, and organizations involved in the crime are prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Complete Liberhan Commission Report Following is the chronology of the important dates related to the Babri Masjid demolition: Dec 22, 1949: Idols of Ram Lalla were allegedly installed inside the 16th century Babri mosque in the night by a group of Hindus following which a court ruled that the site be locked against entry to quarrelling Hindus and Muslims. In 1984 the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) launched a massive movement for opening the locks of the mosque whose ownership was disputed by fanatical Hindus who said it was the site of an ancient Ram temple that was razed by Mughal emperor Babur. Feb 1, 1986: Faizabad session judge allowed Hindus to worship at the site and the locks were re-opened. Nov 9, 1989: The then prime minister Rajiv Gandhi, allowed ’shilanyas’, or ground-breaking ceremony, at an undisputed site. Sep 25, 1990: The then BJP president L.K. Advani launched a Rath Yatra – an ancient Hindu warrior-style campaign on a chariot that was actually a converted Toyota van – from Somnath in Gujarat to Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh; November 1990: Advani was arrested on the way in Samastipur in Bihar, following which the V.P. Singh-led coalition government, propped by the Left and the BJP, fell after the BJP withdrew support; Dec 6, 1992: Tens of thousands of karsevaks, who had massed at Ayodhya from all over the country in what was a well-planned operation, demolished the disputed structure. The incident triggered widespread communal riots in the country and led to the loss of hundreds of lives. Dec 16, 1992: M.S. Liberhan Commission was set up by the government to probe the circumstances that led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid. March 12, 2003: The Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) began excavation in Ayodhya on the directions of the Allahabad High Court to ascertain whether a temple existed at the place where the Babri Masjid was built. June 30, 2009: The Liberhan Commission submitted its report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh after 17 years of its formation and 48 extensions. Nov 2009: The Liberhan report is tabled hurriedly in Parliament after it’s leaked to a daily Accused as named by Liberhan Commission The Liberhan Commission of Inquiry that probed the 1992 razing of the Babri mosque found 68 people culpable for leading the country to the brink of communal discord. This includes Atal Bihari Vajpayee, who later became the prime minister. The names (in the order given by the Commission): 1. Acharya Dharamendra Dev, Dharam Sansad 2. Acharya Giriraj Kishore, VHP: He serves as the senior vice-president of the Vishwa Hindu Parishad, International wing of the Hindu Nationalist Sangh Parivar. 3. A.K. Saran, IG. Security, Uttar Pradesh: then Lucknow Zone IG, retired in 2002 as DG (Home Guards) and is now settled in Patna. “My statement before the Commission was recorded in 2001. I had convinced the Commission about my stand during the cross-examination about the role of the IG Zone in the law the order situation in Ayodhya. I do not know what charges the Commission has framed against me that too after an investigation of 17 years,” Saran said. 4. Akhilesh Mehrotra, Add. Superintendent of Police, Faizabad: the then Additional SP of Faizabad, retired as DIG last year. 5. Ashok Singhal, VHP: is the International President of Vishwa Hindu Parishad. 6. Ashok Sinha, Secretary, Tourism, Uttar Pradesh 7. Atal Bihari Vajpayee, BJP: served as the eleventh Prime Minister of India. After a brief stint as Prime Minister in 1996. There are at least 22 references to Mr Vajpayee in the over 1029-page Liberhan Commission report but the most critical ones are in its ‘Conclusions’ in Chapter 14 where it goes on to say that former party ideologue K Govindacharya’s description of Mr Vajpayee as BJP’s mukhauta (mask) could in fact be applied to what the commission calls the pseudo-moderates. 8. Badri Prasad Toshniwal, VHP: died in 1994 and was ex president of Sewa Mandir Foundation, Ajmer( Rajsthan) 9. Baikunth Lal Sharma, VHP: former BJP MP from East Delhi. 10. Balasaheb Thackeray, Shiv Sena: is the founder and Chief of the Shiv Sena, a Hindu extremist, Marathi ethnocentric and populist party based in Indian state of Maharashtra. 11. B.P. Singhal, VHP: is brother of VHP leader Ashok Singhal was also BJP Rajya Sabha MP. 12. Braham Dutt Divedi, BJP, Revenue Minister, Uttar Pradesh: Brahm Dutt Dwivedi was a cabinet minister in Government of Uttar Pradesh and a senior leader of Bharatiya Janata Party. He was murdered in 1998. 13. Champat Rai, Local Construction Manager 14. Dau Dayal Khanna, BJP 15. D.B. Roy, Senior Superintendent of Police, Faizabad 16. Devraha Baba, Sant Samaj 17. Gurjan Singh, VHP/RSS 18. G.M. Lodha, BJP 19. S. Govindacharya, RSS 20. H.V. Sheshadri, RSS 21. Jai Bhhagwan Goyal, Shiv Sena 22. Jai Bhan Singh Pawaria, Bajrang Dal 23. K.S. Sudarshan, RSS 24. Kalraj Mishra, BJP 25. Kalyan Singh, BJP (Chief Minister) 26. Khushabhau Thakre, RSS 27. Lalji Tandon, BJP, Energy Minister, Uttar Pradesh 28. Lallu Singh Chauhan, BJP 29. L.K. Advani, BJP 30. Mahant Avaidyanath, Hindu Mahasaba 31. Mahant Nritya Gopal Das, Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas 32. Mahant Paramhans Ram Chander Dass, VHP 33. Moreshwar Dinanant Save, Shiv Sena 34. Morpanth Pingale, Shiv Sena 35. Murli Manohar Joshi, BJP 36. Om Pratap Singh 37. Onkar Bhava, VHP 38. Pramod Mahajan, BJP 39. Parveen Togadia, VHP 40. Prabhat Kumar, Principal Secretary, Home, Uttar Pradesh: 1963 batch IAS officer of the UP cadre was principal secretary (Home) on December 6, 1992, rose to become cabinet secretary in 1998 during the NDA rule. Later, he was appointed as Governor of Jharkhand and had to resign on February 1, 2002, following a controversy when businessman Ashok Chaturvedi alleged that Prabhat Kumar had accepted his hospitality. 41. Purshottam Narain Singh, VHP 42. Rajendra Gupta, Minister, Uttar Pradesh 43. Rajender Singh alias Rajju Bhayya RSS 44. Ram Shankar Agnihotri, VHP 45. Ram Vilas Vedanti, Sant Samaj 46. R.K. Gupta, BJP, Finance Minister, Uttar Pradesh 47. R.N. Shrivastava, District Magistrate, Faizabad: former district magistrate of Faizabad, is the neighbour of the firebrand Hindutva leader Vinay Katiyar, Rajya Sabha MP, in Gomti Nagar area of Lucknow. He has since retired. He says the Liberhan Commission is “irrelevant” in his case, because he was suspended after the demolition and his prosecution was also ordered; the case is pending in a Lucknow court. 48. Sadhvi Ritambara, Sant Samaj 49. Shankar Singh Vaghela, BJP 50. Satish Pradhan, Shiv Sena 51. Shri Chander Dikshit, BJP 52. Sita Ram Agarwal 53. S.P. Gaur, Commissioner, Uttar Pradesh: 1974 batch IAS officer of the UP cadre, is presently chairman of the Inland Waterways Authority of India under the Ministry of Shipping and Transport. He was summoned by the Commission in 1996. “I have learnt through media reports that my name has appeared in the report of the Commission, but nothing has been officially communicated to me. I will comment only after studying the report,” said Gaur. 54. Sunder Singh Bhandari, BJP 55. Surya Pratap Sahi, Minister, Uttar Pradesh 56. Swami Chinmayanand, VHP 57. Swami Sachidanand Sakshi alias Sakshiji Maharaj, BJP 58. S.V.M. Tripathi, Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh: the then DGP, has since retired. “I cannot comment on my indictment till I go through the specific reasons given by the Liberhan Commission in the report. I am also not aware about the details of the ATR tabled before the House. The Babri demolition at Ayodhya took place on December 6 and I went on deputation to Delhi on December 22 as CRPF director-general and retired from the same post in 1996,” Tripathi said. The former DGP said he appeared before the Commission on May 1, 2002 where his statement was recorded and he was cross-examined. “I also submitted my affidavit.” 59. Swami Satmit Ramji, Sant Samaj 60. Swami Satyanandji, Sant Samaj 61. Swami Vam Devji, Sant Samaj 62. Uma Bharti, VHP 63. U.P. Bajpayee, Deputy Inspector General, Faizabad: the then Faizabad Range DIG, retired as IG in 1995 and is settled in Allahabad. Bajpai said, “I explained my role and stand when my statement was recorded in 2000. What else I can say except that let the government decide over the action to be taken against me.” 64. Vijaya Raje Scindia, BJP 65. V.K. Saxena, Chief Secretary, Uttar Pradesh 66. Vinay Katiyar, RSS 67. Vishnu Hari Dalmia, VHP 68. Youdh Nath Pandey, Shiv Sena

Indian Muslim News - ISSUES

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | | Posted in , ,

Cleric under fire for planning daughter’s wedding on Dec 6

By Virendra Nath Bhatt

With various Muslim bodies in favour of observing December 6, the day the Babri Masjid was demolished in 1992, as a day of mourning, a prominent Muslim cleric’s decision to solemnise his daughter’s wedding on the day has stirred a hornet’s nest. Maulana Kalbe Jawwad, prominent Shia cleric and Imma-e-Juma of Lucknow, who leads the Friday prayer in historic Asifi mosque, has come under fire from a section of the clergy for his decision.

Defending the decision, Maulana Kalbe Sadiq, vice president of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) said, “One can not retain the memory of a tragedy for the whole life. Indeed, the demolition of the mosque was a tragedy but why should the essential works of life and society be suspended on that day every year?”

He also pointed out that December 6, the18th day of the month of Bakr-Id, as per the Islamic calendar is a auspicious day for the Shia’s, celebrated across the world as ‘Eid-e-gadeer’. On this day Prophet Mohammed had performed the last pilgrimage (Haj) of his life and had declared Hazrat Ali as his successor.

Maulana Jawwad is not alone in holding the ceremony on the said date. Bilal, son of a Sunni Muslim cleric and member of AIMPLB Maulana Sajjad Nomani is holding his Dawat-e-walima (reception) on December 6. “I reject this black day and mourning day with the contempt it deserves. A particular date has no significance in Islam. There are other much more important issues before the Muslim community and the whole country and it would be better if we focus our attention on them”, said Maulana Sajjad Nomani.

(Courtesy: Indian Express)

Indian Muslim News - BABARI MASJID

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 14 July 2009 | Posted in ,

Liberhan Commission

Painful wait for Justice

By Ram Puniyani Liberhan commission submitted its four volume report to the Government on 30 of June 2009. It might have been one of the longest times taken by any commission. Liberhans claim that the report got delayed due to non cooperation of leaders involved may have some truth as one knows Kalyan Singh avoided appearing before the commission for long time, and so was the attitude of many of those alleged for demolition. Still all the hearings were complete by 2004. Did it take 5 long years to write the report? Such a long delay in the report coming out, defeats half the purpose of the same. One of the minor reasons of delay has also been the differences in the approach of Justice Liberhan and its chief counsel Anupam Gupta. Gupta after he interrogated Advani, Justice Liberhan apparently told him to apologize to Advani for being harsh. While Gupta maintains that Justice Liberhan had been soft on Advani, despite his role of the chief mobilizer for demolition. Any way most of the facts of the demolition were seen by the country, read in papers and it is difficult to hide the truth of the role of chief players. One awaits the report to be tabled and see what the commission has to say about things which have been reported in the media and seen on the TV by most. One also waits to see the attitude of this Government towards this commission, is it going to be forthright objectivity or dictated by political exigencies. That apart, since the report was submitted some of the accused have been hiding for cover, and some others are saying that since already 17 years have lapsed how the report can be meaningful, if at all? Some of them have questioned the timing of the report. To expect that those involved in demolition will own up the crime and honestly confess to that is something not to be expected. Still Uma Bharati was honest enough to say that I definitely wanted Ram temple to come up (in Ayodhya) and I definitely wanted that building (Babri Mosque) to come down but not in that manner. But I am not going to apologize. I am ready to be hanged for it. It was the same Uma Bharti, who along with Sadhvi Ritambhra was exhorting the Kar Sevaks by saying, Ek Dhakka Aur Do: Babri Masjid Tod do. (Give one more push, break the Babri mosque) To her credit Uma Bharati has stated that the BJP leaders have tasted the cream of power due to this demolition so now they shouls also be ready to go to jail. She had expressed her joy after the demolition by hugging another accused, Murli Manohar Joshi who was sharing dais with her. Amongst others who shared the dais, when the demolition work was in progress, were Lal Krishna Advani, Ashok Singhal and ex- RSS chief K. Sudarshan himself. How do people respond to the crime after executing it, is a matter of great variance. Same Murli Manohar Joshi, who before the demolition had said told his followers "demolish the masjid, nature of Kar Seva will be determined by Sants and not by courts/demolition is prerequisite for temple building", in the hearing of the commission he said that With all humility, I say that the incident was never remotely conceived by us. This is despite the fact that Vinay Katiyar, the then Bajrang Dal chief had asserted that "Masjid will be demolished and debris will be thrown in river Sarayu". During the deposition he distracted form the main issue and doubted the need of commission and said that Ram Lalla is the owner of the place. While Lal Krishna Advani had stated the Kar Seva will done with Bricks and shovels, kar sevaks are not going to Ayodhya to sing Bhajan and Kirtans, later he declared that the day of demolition was the saddest day of his life. Which is the real Advani is difficult to say. K. Sudarshan, who later became RSS Sarsnghchalak, stated that he heard Nirmala Deshpande saying that Mosque fell due to the explosion inside. Nirmala Deshpande disowned the statement. Kalyan Singh takes the cake as for as turn-arounds are concerned. Before the demolition he committed to National Integration Council and through a sworn affidavit to Supreme Court, that he will protect the mosque. When demolition began he did not deploy 20000 central forces stationed barely 10 minutes from the place. Later he was imprisoned for a day and he proudly justified his inaction in the path of Ram Temple. He filed a 300 page affidavit, taking a line, which was in accordance with his the then Partys line, stating that it was a spontaneous act by uncontrollable Kar Sevaks. With his problems beginning with BJP, he hit out at A.B.Vajpayee, Advani and Joshi saying Babri was destroyed on the instructions of senior BJP leaders. The then Prime Minister P.V. Narsimha Rao was famously having the afternoon siesta when the Babri was being demolished and he covered his inaction by putting the blame on Kalyan Singh. Immediately he promised that Babri will be restored at the same spot. It all raises the question of political morality. How the actors in the tragic act have been taking stances according the political calculations. How they regard that public memory is short and they can wriggle out of their crimes by mere play of words. And now with report on the table of the Congress Government can one expect justice? The experience so far is far from optimistic. Congress weighs the issues on the scale of political advantages or otherwise. On one hand it tries to put a show that it will do justice and when the crunch time comes one finds it wanting in resolve to stand firmly for secularism and justice. Political calculations have been its guiding load stones. So even now one is not sure about the real justice coming through after 17 long years of wait. BJP on its part is a divided house. It has used the Ram Temple agitation and the consequent demolition and the violence for politically strengthening itself. It is around this agitation, demolition and violence that it came to occupy the major position on the political scene in India. Now having been in power and having seen that Lord Ram cannot eternally help it to keep coming to power, some of its major leaders have been rethinking the political line to be adopted. What one sees around is the total opportunism for the sake of power. They realize the necessities of such issues to be in power, they also see that beyond a point it can be counter productive. Now its up to them to keep adopting double standards or to come to adopt democratic issues as their political base. Can BJP shift away from such issues and take up the issues of the poor and downtrodden? This is a million-vote question. This is also a question related to the goals of its political father, the RSS. How does RSS evaluate its future role in Indian political chessboard? Indications are RSS will stick to Hindutva and Ram temple type of issues, come what may. One only hopes in despair that people concerned have honesty to own up their acts and face the legal consequences for their commitments! [Ram Puniyani is a prolific writer. He writes on issues of social concern. He can be reached at ram.puniyani@gmail.com]

Indian Muslim News - BABARI MASJID

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 07 July 2009 | Posted in ,

All India Muslim Personal Law Board to discuss Liberhan Report on July 12
The All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) announced that it would be holding its executive body meeting at Kozhikode in Kerala July 12. The AIMPLB also said that its members would discuss the Liberhan Report on Babri Masjid demolition during the meet. Maulana Khalid Rasheed Firangi Mahali, a senior board member, said that even though the Liberhan Commission has taken 17 years instead of three months to submit its report, we would still like to know what the report has to say about the martyrdom of the 16th century Babri Masjid. The report would least of all, expose the role of several political leaders behind the demolition. The report on the 1992 Babri Masjid demolition by the Liberhan Commission, which was formed 17 years ago, was submitted on 7th July 2009 to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh. AIMPLB legal adviser Zafaryab Jilani, Convener of the erstwhile Babri Masjid Action Committee (BMAC), reacting to the Liberhan Report presentation said that all those who were responsible for the demolition should be punished. "Muslim law panel to ask the Prime Minister to take a decision on the report within three months after it is tabled before the parliament. I hope the government does not waste any time in placing the report before the parliament now," Jilani said. It may be noted that Jilani has been closely associated with the legal aspects of the issue being dealt with simultaneously by a special trial court as well as the Allahabad High Court.

Indian Muslim News - BABARI MASJID

Posted by Indian Muslim Observer | 22 March 2009 | Posted in

Reviving Babari Masjid agitation at this stage will serve no particular purpose: Syed Shahabuddin “No particular purpose would be served by the revival of Babari Masjid agitation at this stage.” This statement has come from Convenor of Babari Masjid Movement Coordination Committee (BMMCC) Syed Shahabuddin at a time when India braces for 2009 parliamentary elections. Babari Masjid Movement Coordination Committee was established in December 1986 to spearhead movement to get Babari Masjid restored to Muslims for prayers. Babari Masjid was attached in 1949 and Hindus and Muslims were legally barred from offering prayers there. However, acting on the petition of a local advocate in February 1986 a Sessions Judge at Faizabad court passed an order opening the locks of the Babari Masjid without consulting or hearing the Muslims who were the party to the case. Syed Shahabuddin, who is also a member of the All India Muslim Personal law Board Committee on Babari Masjid that is engaged in representing the Muslim side before the Special Bench of the Allahabad High Court, counseled restraint and said that those striving to restore the Babari Masjid have to wait patiently till the Supreme Court delivered its judgment on the question of title and even later as it was more than likely that the loser in the title suit will file an appeal to the Supreme Court. “The Government could implement the roadmap drawn by the Supreme Court in October 1994 only after the final verdict comes. It is now the duty of the Government to maintain the status quo until the verdict,” Syed Shahabuddin said. According to Syed Shahabuddin insofar as the Muslim side was concerned various Muslim bodies including BMMCC have committed themselves to accept the final juridical verdict on the title. However, it is unfortunate that the Hindu side – Sangh Parivar, VHP and Ram Janam Bhumi Nyas, have so far refused to make a similar commitment and had taken the stand that they shall accept the juridical verdict only if it was in their favour. This stand will create a piquant situation for the Government of the day to tackle, he said. Another prominent leader associated with the Babari Masjid movement Jawed Habeeb also demanded that it is time that the report of Liberhan Commission on the demolition of the mosque be made public. Jawed Habeeb was elected Chairman of the All India Babari Masjid Action Committee at its meeting held after about 14 years on 8 February 2009.

Editor's Pick

विदेशी तब्लीगी जमाअत के लोगों की रिहाई के लिए इम्पार का गृह सचिव को पत्र

मद्रास हाई कोर्ट के आदेश के बाद आने वाली बाधा को गृह मंत्रालय से दूर करने की अपील  नयी दिल्ली: इंसानी बुनियादों पर विदेशी तबलीगी जमात के लोग...

IMO Search Finder

Subscribe IMO

    Archive