Jamiat files re­view plea against Ay­o­d­hya ver­dict

The Asian Age - - Front Page - PARMOD KU­MAR

The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind on Mon­day moved the Supreme Court seek­ing re­con­sid­er­a­tion of its Novem­ber 9 ver­dict giv­ing the own­er­ship of the dis­puted site at Ay­o­d­hya to the idol of Ram Lalla for the con­struc­tion of a Ram tem­ple, that it said not only amounted to con­don­ing the illegal acts of the Hindu par­ties but also re­ward­ing them.

Not­ing that he was con­scious of the sen­si­tive na­ture of the is­sue and that he un­der­stands the need to put an end to the dis­pute in or­der to main­tain

peace and har­mony in In­dia, pe­ti­tioner Maulana Syed Ash­had Rashidi as­serted there could be no last­ing peace with­out jus­tice or ac­count­abil­ity.

Maulana Syed Ash­had Rashidi is the pres­i­dent of Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind in Lucknow. Point­ing to “er­rors” in the Novem­ber 9 or­der, the plea for re­con­sid­er­a­tion says that by di­rect­ing a tem­ple to be built at the dis­puted site amounted to de­struc­tion of the Babri Masjid if it had not al­ready been de­mol­ished on De­cem­ber 6, 1992.

The di­rec­tion for a “tem­ple to be built at the dis­puted land, which vir­tu­ally amounts to a man­damus to de­stroy, be­cause had the Babri Masjid not been il­le­gally de­mol­ished on De­cem­ber 6, 1992, the ex­e­cu­tion of the present or­der would have re­quired the de­struc­tion of an ex­ist­ing mosque to

make space for a pro­posed tem­ple”, says the petition.

Though the Supreme Court in its ver­dict had noted three of the sev­eral il­le­gal­i­ties com­mit­ted by the Hindu par­ties, the re­view petition says yet it pro­ceeded to “not only con­done the said illegal acts but to award the same by al­lot­ting the dis­puted site to the Hindu par­ties”.

Mon­day was the 24th day since the judg­ment was pro­nounced on Novem­ber 9. The plea for re­con­sid­er­a­tion of ver­dict can be filed within 30 days of the pro­nounce­ment of the judg­ment.

The three il­le­gal­i­ties pointed out by the pe­ti­tioner seek­ing the re­call of the Novem­ber 9 or­der in­cludes dam­ag­ing the domes of the Babri Masjid in 1934, des­e­crat­ing the Babri Masjid by plac­ing the idols of Ram Lalla un­der the cen­tral dome in 1949 and the de­mo­li­tion of the Babri Masjid in 1992. The petition con­tended that in­stead of award­ing the dis­puted site to the Mus­lim par­ties, it was given to the Hindu par­ties, know­ing well that their claim over the dis­puted site was based on three acts of il­le­gal­i­ties in 1934, 1949 and 1992. Say­ing the Babri Masjid was de­mol­ished on De­cem­ber 6, 1992 in brazen vi­o­la­tion of mul­ti­ple or­ders of the Supreme Court, the re­view petition has noted that even the court had in its Novem­ber 9 or­der said the events of De­cem­ber 6, 1992 were an “egre­gious vi­o­la­tion” of the rule of law.

Ar­shad Madani

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.