‘Hindu Tal­iban’ razed Babri, can’t claim site now: Mus­lim par­ties

The Times of India (New Delhi edition) - - TIMES NATION -

New Delhi: Mus­lim par­ties stak­ing full claim to the dis­puted Ay­o­d­hya site told the Supreme Court on Tues­day those who de­mol­ished the Babri Masjid could not claim own­er­ship and said the act was the hand­i­work of “Hindu Tal­iban”.

In the midst of lin­ger­ing ar­gu­ments on whether a five­judge con­sti­tu­tion bench should be as­signed the task of de­ter­min­ing if a mosque was es­sen­tial for of­fer­ing na­maz (prayer) by Mus­lims, se­nior ad­vo­cate Ra­jeev Dha­van said, “Bamiyan Bud­dhist stat­ues were de­stroyed by Mus­lim Tal­iban in Afghanistan and in 1992, Hindu Tal­iban de­stroyed the Babri Masjid.” He ar­gued the dis­puted site never be­longed to those stak­ing claim on it for the last 500 years.

Ap­pear­ing for the cen­tral Shia Waqf Board, se­nior ad­vo­cate S N Singh told a bench of Chief Jus­tice Di­pak Misra and Jus­tices Ashok Bhushan and S Ab­dul Nazeer that the mosque, since it was built by Babur’s Shia gen­eral Mir Baqi, be­longed to the Shias. “For the unity, in­tegrity, peace and har­mony of this coun­try, the Shias want to do­nate the share of Mus­lims in the dis­puted land for con­struc­tion of a Ram tem­ple,” Singh said.

Dha­van dis­missed the Shia as­ser­tion to say, “Shias are in­dulging in a non-ex­is­tent act of char­ity.” He re­turned to his argument on the mosque de­molo­tion and said, “No faith has a right to de­stroy a mosque... The fact that a mosque was de­stroyed does not con­clude the argument that mosque is not es­sen­tial for of­fer­ing na­maz. No faith which de­stroyed a mosque can lay a claim by tak­ing the ex­pan­sive ground that since the mosque is de­mol­ished, let’s di­vide the land on which it stood.” The lawyer swooped on for­mer at­tor­ney gen­eral K Parasaran’s argument that mosques were not es­sen­tial for prayer as the pil­grim­age destinations of Mus­lims lay out­side India at Mecca and Me­d­ina and not at a masjid in India. Terming the argument “in­vid­i­ous”, Dha­van said this could lead to sup­pres­sion of re­li­gious ac­tiv­i­ties of mi­nori­ties. “There are so many gur­d­waras in Delhi. Should some one say the Sikhs have no right to go there... as their pil­grim­age is at Golden Tem­ple? ...We can­not adopt such an argument... It will be a gross vi­o­la­tion of right to re­li­gion...,” Dha­van said.

“From 1526, there was no tem­ple at the Babri Masjid site in Ay­o­d­hya. The Hin­dus tres­passed and in­stalled their idol in1949... And now they are rais­ing the is­sue of es­sen­tial­ity of mosque for of­fer­ing na­maz af­ter de­mol­ish­ing the mosque,” he added.

AFP

AR­GU­MENTS IN SC

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from India

© PressReader. All rights reserved.