Quest for truth or controversy
One of the most prominent and controversial examples of preserving heritage in legal battles is the Ayodhya dispute, which revolves around the ownership and possession of a site in Ayodhya, Uttar Pradesh, that Hindus believe to be the birthplace of Lord Rama, a prominent deity in Hindu mythology. The site also had a mosque known as the Babri Masjid, which was built in the 16th century by the Mughal emperor Babur.
The dispute has also raised various legal issues, such as the interpretation of historical and archaeological evidence, the application of religious freedom and secularism, the recognition of faith and belief, and the balancing of rights and interests.
Post-Independence Developments
This Ayodhya case took a sharp turn post-independence in December 1949 when the deity of Hindu Lord Ram was found in the main part of the structure. This enraged the Muslim community, and they allegedly blamed the Hindus for having placed it there. As the situation worsened, the government declared a ban on the whole area, restricting both the parties from going inside. Simultaneously, many civil cases get filed by both parties to remove the ban and get total possession of the area.
The mediation by various civil courts led to more tension in this case. For instance, the Faizabad Court gave a verdict in 1986 that Hindus are permitted to worship the deity of their Lord Ram inside the area, which enraged the Muslims, and they started making their committees and filing cases demanding possession of the area and avoiding Ayodhya temple being built.
Another Significant Turning Point in the Case
There was a significant impact on the Ayodhya Ram Mandir history and this case when kar Sevaks moved to Ayodhya in December 1992. The karsevaks destroyed and demolished the disputed structure built there and built a temporary Ram Mandir in its place. This incident led to severe consequences because the Muslims got enraged, and riots took place all over the country.
For investigation and mediation of this incident, the Liberhan Committee was appointed. The Congress party in power proposed a solution to build both Masjid and temple and a library and museum to solve this Ayodhya case. But this solution received a rejection from the opposition parties, and thus, it was not implemented.
Further Developments and Mediations
The Archaeological Survey of India submitted a report to Allahabad High Court, which proves that there was a temple on that land in the 12th century and a Masjid in 1528. However, there is no proof of the temple in the middle 300 years.
The dispute was started in 1528, and the major cause of the case lies in a plot of land in the birthplace of the Hindu god, Ram, which is Ayodhya, situated in Uttar Pradesh. Over time, a series of incidents related to the case took place, all of which had a significant impact on the dispute. As this Ayodhya case got to the notice, the court and government tried to intervene and do mediation which failed a lot of times.
With this Ayodhya case turning longer and longer, the BJP government decided to find a solution in 2002. It took assistance from ASI to furnish themselves with the exact facts. As it came to their knowledge that there was a Ram Mandir in that place, the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High court gave a verdict in 2010. They proposed that the plot be divided into three parts to satisfy all the three committees made by both Hindus and Muslims. But this led to more tensions due to which Supreme Court declaring that the judgement would be taken back in 2011.
The Supreme Court-appointed, a mediation panel to solve this complicated Ayodhya case. After submitting a final report by this mediation panel as they were not able to get upon a result, the Supreme Court hold hearings for almost 40 days to come to a final solution.The hearing of this case in the Supreme Court had a bench that consisted of five judges, namely Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, and Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice Abdul Nazeer.
The final solution proposed by the Supreme court was that the 2.77-acre plot in Ayodhya, where Babri Masjid was built, would be given over to Ram Lalla Virajman, and a separate plot of 5 acres of land would be given to Sunni Waqf Board through the central or state government. With this final verdict, the Supreme Court closed the Ayodhya case by trying to satisfy both Hindu and Muslim parties.The court also directed the central government to set up a trust to oversee the construction of the temple, and to provide suitable land for the mosque.\
Conclusion
The Ayodhya case has been one of the most complicated socio-political cases encountered by the Indian judiciary primarily due to the peculiar Ayodhya Ram Mandir history. The dispute lasted for over five decades. It was one of the cases for which the Supreme Court held hearings for this Ayodhya temple case for a very long time, primarily due to the sensitivity of the case and the involvement of Hindus and Muslims. After a long procedure, the Supreme Court gave the final verdict on 9th November 2019, closing this peculiar and complicated case by trying to satisfy both Hindu and Muslim parties.
