|
THE NATION:
AYODHYA
God's
Advocates
With
delay built into the court battles being fought over the ownership of
Ayodhya's most famous site, the VHP turns on the heat.
By
Ashok Malik in Ayodhya
Driving
though the narrow but reasonably well-paved lanes of Ayodhya, my eyes
strain to spot Vinay Katiyar's house. The Lok Sabha member from Faizabad
has told me that he stays "behind Kanak Bhavan". So I wave to
a bystander, a little man in a crumpled kurta.
"Kanak
Bhavan kahan hai?" I ask him.
"Peechhe chhor aaye aap, dahine ghumna tha."
"Kya (Ram) mandir ke paas hai?"
"Jee haan, masjid ke paas."
 |
| The
VHP's two construction workshops in Ayodhya employ about 100 artisans
from as far away as Gujarat |
Having
said that, my extremely polite, almost gentle interlocutor walks away.
He leaves me with one answer; and numerous questions.
People
in Ayodhya, a whole generation of journalists has assured the world, are
no different from the rest of the human race. A walk around the Faizabad
chowk, the bustling marketplace 6 km from the "disputed structure"-the
destruction of which convulsed a whole civilisation on December 6, 1992-confirms
this and is, in fact, an education in consumer behaviour.
The same
impulses you see in a supermarket in south Mumbai come into play here,
the same advertising techniques act as allurements. A huge Gelusil hoarding
stands a few feet from a hakim's tiny clinic; copycat VIP suitcases beckon
shoppers; the decidedly old Shahab Boot House now sells Woodlands and
Adidas footwear. The Ghantaghar, the colonial clock tower that is arguably
the most aesthetic structure in these parts, looks elegant. Everybody,
everywhere is chewing either paan or neem twigs. All is well with the
world.
Then you
hear the clip-clop of the horses carrying a posse of policemen, and notice
the extraordinarily large number of men in uniform hanging around the
market. Speaking to locals-shopowners, students, mechanics, priests, everymen-you
gather they are, as would be expected, decent folk with normal aspirations.
That's till you mention the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri masjid. Hindus and Muslims
don't scream, screech, froth at the mouth or grab the nearest dagger.
They want nothing but amity; they also want nothing but the temple-or
the mosque. The polarisation is latent but near complete.
By common
consensus-and the prevailing wisdom in political circles in Delhi-the
court should sort out the dispute. Fair enough, but what exactly are the
cases and how close is the court to judgement?
Religion
in the witness box
The contemporary
legal battle began in 1949. Till December 22 that year, idols of the boy
(lalla) Ram and those of Sita and Lakshman were worshipped on a chabutra
(platform) just outside the mosque. For years the chabutra mandir as well
as the adjoining Sita ki Rasoi building had been in the possession of
the Nirmohi Akhada, a seminary of the Ramanandiya Bairagi sadhu sect.
 |
"Construction
should begin in 2001 end."
Vinay Katiyar, Faizabad MP |
Between 2
and 3 a.m. on December 23, 1949, the idols were shifted from the chabutra
to right under the mosque's central dome. The next morning Ayodhya was
in a tizzy. The property was attached, the district magistrate (DM) appointed
receiver and the matter heard under Section 145 of the Indian Penal Code
("joining or continuing in unlawful assembly, knowing it has been
commanded to disperse").
The DM was
to decide "which party was in peaceful possession of the property
up to two months before the event". The Muslims-represented by Haji
Feku (zamindar and chairman of the municipality), Haji Faikh, Acchan Mian
(both zamindars), Zahur Ahmed (surma shop-owner) and weaver-factotum Syed
Hashim Ansari, at 82, the only one alive now-argued that their right to
offer namaz was being hindered.
The Hindus-represented
by pujari Baldev Das of the Nirmohi Akhada and Abhiram Das of Hanuman
Garhi, a local seminary-said no namaz had been offered since a bloody
riot in 1934.
While the
matter was being heard, worship of idols began behind a locked gate. The
"Section 145 ka kissa" was soon superseded by legal battles
before the Faizabad district court:
1950 (January):
Gopal Singh Bisaria vs Faizabad district administration, Haji Feku and
others. In his petition, Bisaria, a Hindu Mahasabha member from Samthar,
Madhya Pradesh, said his fundamental right to pray at the Ram lalla temple
was being obstructed. Bisaria died in 1992. His son Ramesh Chand has inherited
the case. His lawyer is Ranjit Lal Verma, whose father, Sarabjeet Lal,
was one of the lawyers in 1950.
1950 (October):
Ramchandra Paramhans, a Bihari monk who had made Ayodhya his home, filed
an identical suit. The only difference was that Paramhans sent a notice
to all the defendants and after waiting for the statutory 60 days, filed
a case. An ageing Paramhans withdrew his suit in 1986.
1959: Nirmohi
Akhada vs District administration, leading Muslims of Ayodhya and any
interested Muslim. The Akhada claimed ownership of the site.
1961: Sunni
Central Wakf Board vs District administration, leading Hindus of Ayodhya
and any interested Hindu. The Board claimed ownership of the site.
1989: Justice
(retd) Deoki Nandan Agarwal filed a case as "next friend" of
"perpetual minor" Ram lalla. The plea read: "My sevaks
should be allowed to repair my house."
In 1989,
the cases were transferred to the Allahabad High Court (Lucknow bench),
where the primary evidence is currently being recorded. The Wakf Board
has 200 witnesses to testify that namaz took place at the site till December
22, 1949. Over 150 of them, says Hashim, are dead. About 25 witnesses
are eventually expected to give evidence; the 17th is now being examined.
After these
witnesses, a 100-odd witnesses from the Hindu side are due to give evidence.
Some half of them, says Verma, are dead. As if the languorous process
were not enough, Verma explains why he doesn't expect the courts to ever
reach a verdict.
When the
original plaints were drafted, the idea of making "every interested
Muslim" and "every interested Hindu" a defendant was both
an act of rhetoric and a means of postponing any probable defeat. "The
plan was," admits Verma, "that if a difficult situation arose,
there would be any number of people who would declare themselves parties
and delay the case."
The mofussil
lawyer's trick has become litigation's nightmare. It has ensured that
Hindus and Muslims far away from Ayodhya are now part of the case. It
also means a verdict can, in theory, be postponed till eternity.
What's the
VHP plan?
Katiyar
and Hashim are in absolute agreement that left to themselves, ordinary
Hindus and Muslims will sort things out. The only difference is in terms
of the result. Katiyar says, "We will build a grand mandir. This
has never been a masjid, only a maha zid (great intransigence)."
Hashim-now the pointsman for the Babri Masjid Reconstruction Committee-is
more ominous: "If the mosque is not rebuilt, India will break into
as many pieces as the Babri masjid crumbled to."
The Vishwa
Hindu Parishad (VHP) made the mandir struggle an all-India one in the
1980s. It now thinks its strongest weapon is a shila lekh (stone tablet)
with an inscription dating back to the 12th century and speaking of a
Vishnu temple. It says this was found during the demolition. Its opponents
dismiss this as a "plant". The VHP plans to go ahead with temple
construction anyway. At its January 19-21, 2001 Dharma Sansad (religious
parliament) at the Kumbh Mela in Allahabad, it will set the time table.
Katiyar offers a clue: "A practical date is November-December 2001."
In a happy coincidence, the assembly elections in Uttar Pradesh are due
in March 2002.
The proposed
temple is a two-storeyed, 268.5 ft by 140 ft structure. Its garbha griha
(sanctum sanctorum), Katiyar says, will be the 40 ft by 60 ft area that
once housed the Babri domes. The VHP says it will begin by constructing
four gopurams (gateways) far from the contentious site. It wants the Centre
to release part of the 67 acres the Government has acquired around the
tarpaulin-covered temple (see graphic) for the gateways.
Will the
BJP go back to Ram?
That the
BJP is in a pitiable condition in Uttar Pradesh is no secret. Kalraj Mishra,
state unit president, is candid, "Till a few months ago, people were
saying we wouldn't win more than 30-40 seats. Now I think we are at the
100 level." In a house of 405 MLAs, that figure is certainly not
going to ensure power.
So was Prime
Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee's statement that the "Ram temple is
an expression of national sentiment" designed to galvanise the party
in Uttar Pradesh? Mishra is tentative, "Workers are enthused by sentiment,
and for us sentiment is best expressed through the Ram mandir issue."
A senior
Union Cabinet member emphasises that the mandir card has limited uses:
"As long the dhancha (structure) was there, it was possible to project
it as a symbol of humiliation. Now that it has gone, the same emotions
don't exist." The VHP's calculations are different. Since the demolition
it has grown into the Hindu equivalent of an evangelical movement. For
instance, it uses Ayodhya as the base to educate tribals from Assam to
Madhya Pradesh on how to recite the Ramcharitmanas. In 1995, the VHP's
membership stood at three lakh. Now it has doubled and there are plans
to enrol another 20 lakh by the end of 2001. Obviously a fervid temple
crusade is at the centre of this programme.
The VHP
is increasingly becoming autonomous of the rest of the Sangh Parivar,
even criticising senior RSS leaders of late. Its old guard like Ashok
Singhal has always resented the fact that the Ram movement was hijacked
by the BJP. Praveen Togadia, VHP international general secretary, is determined
that this won't happen again: "We are not concerned whether somebody
loses the kingdom of Sri Lanka or somebody wins Kishkindha. We are going
to build a temple at that spot." As a custodian of substantial votes-particularly
in crucial tribal areas across the country-it figures it can shape the
BJP's agenda.
In Valmiki's
epic, Ram's exile was followed by his return? Will Vajpayee's Ayodhyakand
be a re-run?
-with
Subhash Mishra and Uday Mahurkar
Top
|
METRO TODAY
Forget
endology, writes INDIA TODAY Senior Editor S. Prasannarajan. Celebrate
2001, celebrate the future in 