NEW DELHI: While the arguments in the Ayodhya dispute case were in favour of the Muslim community, the order was to allow the building of the temple for Hindus, argued Justice AK Ganguly during a discussion on the case organised here on Monday.
Advocate Sanjay Hegde and political expert Neera Chandhoke also participated in the discussion, held at the India International Centre.
Reading parts of the judgment, Ganguly said that it was absurd on part of the SC to say that “a mosque is not an essential tenet of Islam and Namaz can be offered in the open”. “The belief and faith of a worshipper cannot be challenged. The Supreme Court hasn’t accepted the minority view,” in announcing its verdict on Ayodhya, he said.
He noted the judgment that said that the Babri Masjid was not built after demolishing a temple. “The structure to which Hindus claimed their rights, has always been a mosque...Muslims never abandoned the mosque...Hindus have always encroached upon it illegally,” he read.“The judgment is loaded (with arguments) in the favour of Muslims,” he stressed.
Neera further argued that the government was under the impression that all questions have been answered and that l the issues have been resolved, but that was not the case. “We don’t just sign a social contract with the government but also with our fellows...when the Hindu community began to say that this is the place where Lord Ram was born, I don’t understand it. As far as I know, Benaras and Mathura come before Ayodhya.”
There has been “rush” on part of the government to set up a committee which will oversee the making of the temple, she said. She further questioned if Babar demolished a temple to build a mosque, “Are we going to do the same thing? It is time that we live with fellow citizens. We must learn to stop this jostling of for space of the place of worship. There could have been a space where everybody could have worshipped.”
Advocate Hegde took the discussion further to say that India needed a court that would do judgements without favour or biases and labelled the SC order as a “Thanedar verdict”. “A Thanedar is only interested in keeping his jurisdiction silent,” he said.