New Delhi: Days after the BJP’s win in UP Assembly polls and Yogi Adityanath taking over as the Chief Minister, the Ram Mandir issue is back on the national centre stage.
On Tuesday, the Supreme Court suggested an out-of-court settlement of the Ram Janmabhumi- Babri Masjid land dispute at Ayodhya. Observing that the sensitive religious issue involving faith must be sorted out through talks between the parties, the court indicated that one of its judges can be spared to mediate between the parties.
Chief Justice J.S. Khehar, sitting with Justices D.Y. Chandrachud and Sanjay Kishan Kaul, himself offered to mediate between the parties. The CJI told the BJP leader Subramanian Sw-amy, who sought early hearing of the appeals. “These are not issues which can be sorted out in a huff. Why don’t you (counsels) sit and sort it out? Sit across, give a bit here, take a bit there?” The CJI asked Dr Swamy to mention the matter again on March 31.
This is a matter of faith, Supreme Court told
Wasting no time, Hindutva hardliners and Union ministers like Giriraj Singh and Uma Bharti demanded the construction of the “magnificent Ram temple” at the disputed site, while the Babri Masjid Action Committee ruled out an out-of-court settlement.
Earlier, seeking early hearing Swamy told the Bench, “This is an issue of great public interest. It has been pending in this court for six years. We should be heard. If we can prove that there was pre-existing temple there (in the disputed site), the land should be handed over to us. The other side is claiming the land by adverse possession. This is a matter of faith.”
The CJI said: “We will hear this soon after the summer vacation as soon as we have three new judges. But why don’t you sit across a table and sort it out?” Swamy said that he had already spoken to all parties and tried this.
The Chief Justice, however, rejected his submission saying that they must try again. “If you want any sitting judge to sit between we can give you one. You can have me. Or you can have my brother (Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul)? We will not then hear the case later. You need a moderator to sit in-between because there are tough issues to sort out. But this is the best way to sort such issues out. Speak to them again. Any sitting judge. These are issues of religion involving sentiments. Sit across the boa
Temple debate
- September 25, 1990: Advani launches a rath yatra from Somnath to Ayodhya to galvanise support for the issue countrywide.
- November 1990: Advani’s rath was stopped and he was arrested in Samastipur, Bihar. Dissatisfied with the development, the BJP withdrew its support to the VP Singh government, triggering fresh elections. The saffron party made giant strides in the assembly elections by winning a majority.
- March 5, 2003: The Allahabad High Court orders the Archeological Survey of India to excavate the disputed site in order to determine whether a temple existed where the mosque stood.
- August 22, 2003: The ASI submitted its report to the Allahabad HC, saying it had found features of a 10th century temple beneath the site of the masjid.
- August 31, 2003: All India Muslim Personal Law Board said it would challenge the ASI report.
- July 26, 2010: The bench reserves its judgement and advises all parties to solve the issue amicably.
