25 YEARS OF BABRI MASJID
A timeline of the Babri Masjid-Ram temple controversy that has divided the nation and sparked riots
A three-judge SC bench starts hearings into the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute on Tuesday, the eve of the 25th anniversary of the Babri Masjid demolition. In a three-part series, HT explores the sequence, the actors and the fallout of an incident that changed India
forever.
1528-29
Babri Masjid built. Hindu groups claim it was built after demolishing a temple, but some scholars say that such “legends” did not arise until the 18th century
1853
Groups of Hindu priests and Muslim clerics clash-- the first recorded incident of violence over the holy site
1885
Mahant Raghubir Das, a Hindu priest, files the first court case and seeks permission to build a canopy on the Ramchabutra (a raised platform) outside the mosque. Faizabad district court rejects his plea
1949
An idol of Ram Lalla appears inside the mosque, allegedly planted by three Hindu men in the dark of a December night. Hindus offer prayers. Both sides file suits; the government declares the area as disputed and locks gates
1950 & 1959
Two Hindu priests file suits before the Faizabad court seeking permission to offer prayers to Ram idols in the janamsthan (birthplace of Ram). While the inner courtyard remains locked, prayers are allowed. The Nirmohi Akhara files a third suit seeking possession of the site and claiming to be the custodians of Ram Janmabhoomi
1961
The Sunni Central Board of Waqf files a case against the placing of idols in the mosque, challenges claims that the building and surrounding land were once a graveyard
1986
Lawyer Umesh Chandra Pandey appeals before district and sessions judge that the Ram Janmabhoomi gates be unlocked on the grounds that the Faizabad district administration, and not a court, had ordered its closure. Court orders the government to open the Ram Janmabhoomi for “darshan and pooja”
1990
BJP president Lal Krishna Advani goes on a Somnath-to-Ayodhya rath yatra to “educate people” about the movement to build a temple at the disputed site. Thousands of Kar sevaks (volunteers) gather in Ayodhya. Babri Masjid is partially damaged and 30 are killed in police firing
1991
BJP becomes the country’s primary opposition party and comes to power in Uttar Pradesh. The momentum for the temple movement increases as Kar sevaks pour into Ayodhya
1992
Dec 6: Kar sevaks demolish Babri Masjid, sparking riots across India in which over 1,000 people are killed. Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao’s government dismisses BJP govts in UP, MP, Rajasthan and Himachal Dec 16: Ten days after the mosque was demolished, Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao sets up a commission of inquiry under retired judge Justice MS Liberhan
1997
SEPT: A special court hearing the Babri Masjid demolition case orders framing of charges against 49 accused, including senior BJP leaders Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Kalyan Singh (right)
2001
VHP sets March 2002 as deadline for beginning the construction of Ram temple in Ayodhya
2002
FEBRUARY 6: At least 59 people are killed when a train in Godhra in Gujarat carrying kar sevaks from Ayodhya is attacked. Riots erupt across Gujarat in which over 1,000 people are killed APRIL: Lucknow bench of the Allahabad high court begins hearing on determining who owns the Ayodhya site
2009 JUNE:
The MS Liberhan commission submits its report on Babri demolition, but its contents are not made public
2010
SEPT 30: The Lucknow bench of Allahabad high court rules there be a three-way division of the disputed land: one-third for the Sunni Waqf Board, one-third for the Nirmohi Akhara and one-third to the party for Ram Lalla
2011
MAY: The Supreme Court suspends the high court’s ruling after Hindu and Muslim groups appeal against it
2015
FEB: Hindu and Muslim litigants meet to discuss a new proposal for resolution which they plan to put before the Supreme Court. The formula for settlement talks about the 70 acres of disputed site accommodating both mosque and temple, but it doesn’t take off
2015 & 2016
Litigants meet twice again for settling the dispute amicably, but fail