Commenting on recent judgment of the Supreme Court on Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid dispute Sri Provash Ghosh, General Secretary of the SUCI (Communist) in a statement said: ____
For correct judgment of any acts, facts including the recent verdict of Supreme Court on Mandir & Masjid dispute, it is essential to judge dispassionately with a historical, scientific and rational outlook.
Before arising at any conclusion some questions are to be seriously examined.
- Maharshi Valmiki, a legendary verse-writer of ancient time who introduced Ram as an incarnation of god in his works. It was said the story was composed long back before the birth of Ram and stated place of birth of Ram in the palace of Raja Dasaratha at Ajodhya not at the site where Babri Masjid was constructed later on.
- Babri Masjid was constructed in the year 1528. At that time nobody raised any objection claiming that it was the birth place of Ram. Even poet Tulsidas, who composed Ram Charit Manas in the year 1574-75 and made Ram popular among Hindus did not mention at all that Masjid was constructed at the birth place of Ram.
- All the revered exponents of Hindu religion like Chaitanya, Ramakrishna and Vivekananda never raised the point that a Masjid was built at the birth place of Ram. Even Vivekananda questioned the authenticity of Ram as a historical character.
- After more than three hundred years old unchallenged existence of Babri Masjid, during the British rule in 1885, some Hindu priests raised a dispute in this regard. But they did not furnish any concrete and substantial evidence to prove their point. But the British imperialist leaders encouraged raising of the dispute to drive a wedge between the Hindus and Muslims in the aftermath of Sepoy Mutiny.
- Ramlala was placed secretly in the darkness of night in the precincts of Masjid in the year 1949 to stop Namaj there, congress leaders Rajiv Gandhi to win over Hindu votes opened back door of Masjid for Ram Pujan in the year 1986. To counter it and establish absolute control over Hindu vote BJP-Sangh Parivar first started Ram Rath Jatrya inflaming communal riots and thereafter destroyed Babri Masjid, a historical monument.
- There are differences among the archeologists over the findings in regard to archeological past of present Ayodhya. Even if one accepts the particular findings and interpretation of ASI which the Supreme Court has stated to have relied upon in pronouncing the verdict, it would not be proved that Masjid, as alleged, was built on the birthplace of Ram. Moreover, in ancient time, there were many structures here and there. These all are now under the ground. Sometimes, during excavation, some of these are discovered and then differing archeological interpretations are put forth about them. Even there are evidences that many Buddhist temples and stupas were destroyed and replaced by Hindu temples. Will it be justified if there is a clam that all these Hindu temples should demolish now and replaced by Buddhist temples?
- While court criticized act of installation of Ramlala in 1949 and demolition of Babri Masjid in 1992 as illegal act and accepted that Babri Masjid was not built up by destroying the said temple and admitted “scriptural interpretations are susceptible to a multitude of inferences,” but strangely concluded that, “once the court has intrinsic material to accept that the faith or the belief is genuine and not a pretence, it must defer to the belief of the worshiper,” then basing on that gave the ruling that the entire disputed land be handed over to a trust to be constituted for construction of Ram temple and the Muslims be given five acres for building a mosque. It seems it is a reward to the Sangh Paribar and show of pity to the minority community.
Naturally this verdict has made BJP & Sangh Paribar jubilant and they found out a judicial justification of their criminal act of destroying of a historical monument. But it has caused serious concern and agony among the democratic, secular minded, saner section of the people of the country and created doubt about neutrality and impartiality of the judiciary.
We also consider that verdict of Supreme Court is virtually supreme denial of justice ignoring all norms of law and prescripts of jurisprudence and ethics. So far nowhere in the history of democratic jurisprudence religious faith has been placed above law and historical evidence. Accordingly this has created a far reaching serious precedence stimulating religious jingoism.
We call upon the people to ponder over these points, resist attacks upon democratic rights, secular values, and judicial neutrality and maintain unity of the people.