MUSLIM BODY FIRST TO FILE PLEA TO REVIEW AYODHYA VERDICT
NEWDELHI: Complete justice can be done in the Ayodhya case only by ordering the Centre and the Uttar Pradesh government to rebuild the Babri Masjid, argued a review petition filed by a prominent Muslim body on Monday that is the first to challenge the apex court’s landmark verdict in November favouring a Ram temple at the site.
The petition, filed by the president of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind, Maulana Syed Ashhad Rashidi,claimed that though the top court acknowledged several illegalities committed by the Hindu parties, particularly damaging the domes of the Babri Masjid in 1934, desecrating the 16thcentury mosque in 1949 and finally demolishing it in 1992, it condoned those illegal acts by awarding the disputed site to the very party that based its claims on those illegal acts.
“The Supreme Court committed grave error by granting relief to a party who had not approached the Court with clean hands and indulged in repeatedly flouting the orders of the Supreme Court,”argued the petition.
Rashidi’s plea ran into 217 pages and listed out 14 errors in the top court’s November 9 judgment — delivered by a five-judge bench headed by then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Ranjan Gogoi, and including the current CJI SA
Bobde — that awarded title of the 2.77 acre land to Ram Lalla Virajman, the child deity, and awarded five acres of land at an alternative site for a mosque. The court also asked the government to set up a trust to oversee construction of the temple and manage the site.
The errors necessitated a review of the order, Rashidi claimed.
The review petition opens a fresh chapter in the 136-year-old dispute that is among India’s most communally sensitive, and spotlights divisions among Muslim litigants over filing a review petition. The All India Muslim Personal Law Board has already said it will file a review petition, and joined the Ulama in rejecting the offer of alternative land.
But a number of prominent Muslim litigants — including the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board and Iqbal Ansari — have criticised the decision, saying it is best to end the festering dispute.
The review petition was immediately criticised by Hindu groups, who called it an attempt to stall the construction of the temple.
The petition, filed through advocate Ejaz Maqbool, argued that the SC judgment was virtually a direction to demolish Babri Masjid because had the mosque not been illegally demolished on December 6, 1992, the implementation of the present order would have required the destruction of an existing mosque to make space for a proposed temple.
The petition also countered the five-judge SC bench’s finding that the Muslim parties couldn’t establish exclusive possession of the inner courtyard of the Babri Masjid from 1528, while the Hindu parties proved exclusive possession of the outer courtyard. This point eventually proved to be the main ground for the Supreme Court’s decision to award the site to Hindus.
From 1528 till 1856, Oudh, where the mosque was situated, was under Muslim rule and namaz was being offered continuously at the Babri Masjid. After the annexation of Oudh by the British, the grant originally given by Emperor Babur for meeting the expenses of salary of Khatib (Imam, prayer leader) and Muezzin was continued, it is claimed in the petition.
The petitioner has clearly stated that he is not challenging certain findings of the November 9 judgment including the findings on limitation and the finding that court cannot correct historical wrongs.
The power of Supreme Court to review its judgment is limited to correcting errors apparent in its judgment or to remedy grave injustice caused due to its judgment.
THE REVIEW PETITION OPENS A FRESH CHAPTER IN THE 136-YEAR-OLD DISPUTE THAT IS AMONG INDIA’S MOST COMMUNALLY SENSITIVE, AND SPOTLIGHTS DIVISIONS AMONG MUSLIM LITIGANTS OVER FILING A REVIEW PETITION