Hearing again adjourned till 23 March
By Shafique Ahmed Shafique
The Supreme Court had fixed 14 March 2018 as the next date of hearing in the Ayodhya dispute, citing incomplete filing of documents by the petitioners on the prevous date, news agency ANI reported.
The court also granted this time to parties to file additional documents. The apex court also advised warring parties to provide translated copies of excerpts of certain historical books, which have been relied upon by them. Live Law reported that the court had reiterated the parties to treat the matter as a ‘land case.’ Not as mosque and land dispute case. Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra said, “once the Supreme Court starts hearing the case, it will finish it in one go,” News18 reported.
In spite of this claim the present Government of India and its Supreme Court collectively have adopted dilly dallying policy. New hearing was fixed on 14th March 2018 but verdict not announced by the SC and extending the hearing gave a new date that was March 23, 2018 even on that date the Apex Court adjourned hearing and gave another new date that is April 6, 2018.
It is said that ancient India was very united and at that time no such communalism was there in that time. In later period of partition of Bengal and communal award in 1932 by British government was also one of reasons of communal riot. Extremism has also parted main role in this regard. The politicians having vested interest have also played a villainous part in creating serious communal riots in India. There was politics at the root of division of India in 1947. But even after partition, many riots provoked thereafter, we can find the involvement directly or indirectly, of political parties or their activists. Since then series of communal riots are continuously occurring in India. India’s tall claim of being secular state has obviously denied by herself.
Babri Masjid demolition in Ayodhya, 1992 and Mass killing of Muslims in Gujrat are consequences of communal hater, vanity and conceit of majority as well as religious extremism. These are the infamous communal violence. The issue of Babri mosque demolition is still unsettled owing to the above said reasons. The Bharatia Janata Party (BJP) the extremist ruling Party is playing the same role against Muslims. Its philosophy of hater against Pakistan and Muslims is quite evident. The Modi’s govt knows that The Ayodhya verdict can shake the very foundations of India that is the reason why govt and SC are trying to pressurize Muslims to reach an amicable settlement instead of waiting for SC verdict.
Therefore, All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) is being threatened of bloodsheds and being advised to settle the issue of land for mosque and temple out-of-court.
Arguably, the addition of highly respected spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar to the tools available with India’s establishment to help resolve the simmering Babri Masjid in Ayodhya dispute that is fraught with prospects of India’s perpetuation was the most profound development that took place following apex court of India’s direction to the warring parties to the case to work out-of-court settlement instead of waiting for a decision from the SC. The apex court was scheduled to hear the case on March 14. But SC did not give any decision and adjourned the hearing till March 23.
India awaits massive bloodshed. The spiritual leader Sri Sri Ravi Shankar has however, failed to deliver. In other words the parties to the case have failed him. That is why a highly frustrated Sri Shankar has spoken his mind: he was warned of a bloody civil war in India if issue is not resolved in the friendly atmosphere. Keeping in view the role of BJP and Indian Govt, the court is also reluctant to give its decision in this regard. Shanker ‘s feeling is the same as Apex court as he is seeing in mind the result of court verdict. Bharatia Janat Party (BJP) is itself a nationalist and extremist communal party which is governing India. The consequence is understandable.
A newspaper of India “Indian Express” has quoted Sri Sri Ravi as urging the AIMPLB to consider out-of-court settlement to the case, warning that if the matter was not resolved amicably without the court’s intervention the country may face a “large-scale” of communal riot. In his “open letter” which he sent to the members of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB), he wrote that going through the court was a loss for both Muslims and Hidus and an out-of-court settlement would be a “win-win situation” for both the communities .
In his open letter Ravi Shankar has 4 possible situation for the AIMPLB — the court giving away the land to the Muslims, awarding the land to the Hindus upholding the Allahabad High Court order which says that there should be a mosque built on one acre and the remaining 60 acres be utilized to build the temple and Parliament passing a legislation. “In all the 4 options, either through the court or through the government, the result will be devastating for the nation in general and Muslim community in particular.” He has pointed out in his letter. According to Sri Sri Ravi Shankar , the best solution will be an out-of-court, in which the AIMPLB come forward and one acre of land to the Hindus, who, in turn would gift 5 acres of land nearby to the Muslims to build a bigger mosque there. He also advised the leaders of AIMPLB that Islam has allowed the change of the masjid to another location.
He also wrote by referring that Maulana Abdus Salman Nadvi and many other Muslim scholars had endorsed it. Shanker has also opined : “Muslims are not surrendering this land to the people who demolished the Babri Masjid or to a particular organization. On the contrary, they are gifting it to the people of India. They must keep this in their minds and spirit. It is only reconciliation and an expression of their broad-mindedness, benevolence, magnanimity and goodwill.”
The situation, however, raises a critical question: who is responsible for this sorry state of affairs? It is the ruling Bharatia Janata Party (BJP) that it vigorously pursuing an agenda of divisive politics under the garb of “majority is priority” slogan, alienating all minority, particularly Muslims. The BJP, for example, had promised to build Ram Mandir when it went to the electorate prior to the 2014 general elections. It chose not to do fulfill its promise, although it had formed government at centre and in majority of states, including UP where a mahant or Hindu priest is chief minister, it did not do it in order to foment polarization and promote dissension in society. Leaving the task in relation to the dispute to the Apex court. Realizing the gravity of the situation, the court had advocated an out-of-court settlement.
Insofar as Sri Sri’s complaints with regard to All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) are concerned, independent India watchers could safely conclude that he was in fact treated deceitfully and unfairly more by the BJP, the Nirmohi Akhara, the Vishnu Hindu Parishad and Mughal ‘descendant’ Prince Yaqub Habeebuddin Tucy who lives in India’s Hyderabad than other parties to the dispute. Sri Sri is therefore, required to state the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.