The nation heaves a sigh of relief over the five-member bench in the Supreme Court disposing of the Ayodhya matter, allowing the building of the Ram temple in the disputed site. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has now decided to move a review petition against the verdict. It will not accept any alternative land outside the disputed 2.77-acre plot, where the Babri Masjid stood.
Unlike the unanimous verdict of the SC Bench, the opposition by the Muslims appears divided. During a crucial meeting to decide the future course of action the dominant Uttar Pradesh Sunni Central Wakf Board, the main body, and Iqbal Ansari, the son of the original plaintiff Hashim Ansari, were notably absent. The protracted litigation had become a thorn between the Hindus and the Muslims.
The court reprimanded the destruction of the masjid, and the placement of the idols, which it observed was an act of desecration! Provisions allow filing a revision petition within 30 days of the judgement, which the Muslims wish to exercise as a matter of right. They may even go for a curative petition if their attempt at a revision fails.
Muslim rulers, by their avowed stand against idolatry, did demolish many idols and statues, wherever they went not limiting only to ancient India. Such destructions were seen in the case of Bahamian Buddhas by Taliban and many priceless archaeological treasures by ISIS in Iraq. Many mosques were built over razed temples, which is an indisputable fact, whether or not Babri figures in that list.
By agreeing to knock at the doors of the Supreme Court, both groups placed their faith on the Indian Judiciary, which is the most trustworthy of all government institutions today. Ayodhya hearings were fast-tracked and a record 40 days of uninterrupted hearing s were held, before pronouncing their judgement on the matter.
It will be most mature and prudent for all Muslims and Hindus to end the stalemate and to move on from this point, rather than falling prey to rabble-rousers like Owaisi of other militant elements, who did not hesitate to claim that the SC is not infallible. Any further challenges to the court, though permissible by law, will be viewed as an uncompromising attitude by the Muslims at this stage. The abuse of law was visible when such petitions were repeatedly filed to save the terrorist Afzal Guru, relating to his attack on the Indian Parliament in 2001.
On the contrary, the Muslims gracefully could accept the alternative land and build a mosque reflecting the splendour and the plurality of our great nation. We should not let a Masjid or Temple scuttle the growth of the country in any manner and must move on forward! In my humble opinion, the Muslims will earn a lot of goodwill by yielding to the court judgement, which opportunity must not be allowed to slip away.
Sampath Kumar
Intrépide Voix
