In that sense, it is also a relief that a long-pending case has concluded. Essentially this was a land dispute case where the court was deciding who owned the land and by virtue of ownership would be legally in position to build a temple or a masjid. The five judge bench of the Supreme Court, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, was unanimous in its judgement. It ruled that the disputed 2.77 acres of land at Ayodhya belonged to the Hindus and has permitted them to build a temple dedicated to Ram at the spot that is believed to be his birthplace. The Muslims, who were the other party in the dispute, will be allotted five acres of land elsewhere in Ayodhya to build a mosque.
That in essence is the judgement of the apex court, that was reviewing a decision passed by the Allahabad High Court in 2010 that had divided the disputed 2.77 acres of land among the Hindus and Muslims, allotting two thirds of the area to the former and one third to the latter. That judgement had been by a three judge bench that ruled by a majority of 2:1. The Supreme Court decision on the other hand, had all five seniormost judges in total agreement.
The judgement brings closure to the legal dispute on the question of land ownership at Ayodhya. It, however, should not be viewed as a victory for any one side or a loss to another as displays of triumphalism could lead to tension in a country that is to be best avoided. It is hope that the prevailing calm, and the acceptance of the judgement by the parties involved, is not just due to the restrictions mandated by Section 144 of the Criminal Procedure Code that has been imposed by the administration across the country, but because we are all mature individuals who bow to the rule of law and accept the wisdom of the Supreme Court.
However, the Supreme Court has also ruled that the demolition of the Babri Masjid was an act in violation of the law. In December 1992, the 16th century Babri mosque was torn down by rightwing activists. The mosque, it is believed, was built on the ruins of an ancient temple that marked the birthplace of Ram. The apex court has ruled that there is evidence of an older structure and that is one reason why the verdict went towards building a Ram temple at the site. But, that demolition case is still being heard in a Lucknow court. A verdict has to be arrived in this trial too, for there to be complete closure to the Ayodhya case.
The best thing that has happened since the judgement was delivered is that all parties have respected and accepted the verdict, even if one of the parties does not entirely agree with it. Addressing the nation on the verdict, Prime Minister Narendra said, ‘In new India, there is no place for fear, bitterness and negativity.’ It is now the opportune moment for the majority community to reach out to the minority communities and convert this verdict into an occasion for proper and meaningful dialogue. There is need to ensure that there is no hurt caused to the minority community, and if there be any such hurt, that it is not allowed to linger. It is now the time to display the secularism that India has been known for and still retains.
