Latest Articles
Back
A DECISION MADE BY SC ON AYODHYA VERDICT
A DECISION MADE BY THE SC ON AYODHYA VERDICT
The most awaited decision of the Supreme Court revealed that courts of justice, Ayodhya verdict loss to none, justice for all.which has created a few problems. The Supreme Court pronounced its judgement which is accepted by everyone as the final word of court. But court intrigued that the Muslims offered no evidence to indicate the construction of the Mosque in the 16th century.
Once again the verdict has revealed that courts are often courts of law, not of justice. The former Supreme Court judge AK Ganguly, finds it difficult to accept the verdict and questioned that for years there was a Mosque on that land where Muslim had conducted prayers. One may not agree with Justice Ganguly “If Masjid was there, where Mandir, Buddhist stupa, Church was there.......if we start to make such judgement, a lot of temples and other structures will have to be demolished.”
When India became independent, a republic or when adopted the Constitution, can’t be treated as cut-off date. Some other points are valid however, by Justice Ganguly “the damage to the mosque and its desecration is a serious violation of law but the thing is that if you will build another wall on the roof of the others house than it has to be demolished but finally court has served this final judgement merely closed this chapter giving five acres pf land to the Muslims. In the exercise of its jurisdiction, the Supreme Court may pass a decree or make order as is necessary for the complete justice. Another issue is that if a place of worship is not safe whether it is of any religion then what kind of secularism does India profess?
But if we go by this judgment there is no temple, Chruch, or Musjid to be demolished and a Temple built after demolishing a other place of Worship. Ayodhya was a complex case and this judgement deserve attention of several facets, and given unanimously has also sent a strong message and this judgement put a full stop to those who wanted to play politics. The appropriate vocabulary used by the judges with right terminologies and Court has strictly delivered a clinically indisputable judgement on the basis of the verdict delivered is not on the faith or belief but purely and clearly the law of land.
