Ayodhya/Babri verdict

Status
Not open for further replies.

Sir john

T20I Debutant
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Runs
7,565
UP seeks central forces to tackle Babri verdict fallout

The Uttar Pradesh [ Images ] government has urged the Union Home ministry to provide 400 companies of central paramilitary forces in order to tackle the fallout of the much-awaited verdict in the Ramjanmbhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit.

A three-judge special bench of the Allahabad High Court, that concluded the hearing in the long pending case last month, is expected to formally announce its verdict on September 17.

Well before the D-Day, the state government wants to get into a red-alert mode so that it can handle any law and order situation that could arise on account of the judgement.

Chief minister Mayawati [ Images ] called on Governor B L Joshi on Monday to discuss this issue. "The chief minister apprised the Governor of the state's request for 400 companies of central paramilitary forces across the state", a top official said. This figure did not include the state police and PAC deployment that the state was planning.

He said, "after all we must have sufficient precautionary measures in place to prevent mischief-mongers from inciting trouble."

While heavy deployments are proposed in and around Ayodhya, the central forces would also be kept in readiness in all other communally sensitive cities and towns of the state.

Besides, the twin towns of Ayodhya-Faizabad, Varanasi, Mathura, Lucknow [ Images ], Kanpur, Gonda, Bahraich, Allahabad, Aligarh, Moradabad and Meerut would also be heavily policed.

This follows a high-level meeting of administrative and police officials in Lucknow on Tuesday. Chaired by cabinet secretary Shashank Shekhar Singh, the meeting was attended by principal home secretary Kunwar Fateh Bahadur, director general of police Karamveer Singh , additional DGP Brij Lal as well as the zonal IGs and DIGs of police.

While the High Court were to determine the key issues relating to right over the disputed property, the case relating to the demolition of the mosque was pending before a separate special CBI court in Lucknow.
 
Ayodhya verdict: Govt asks states to strengthen security

Fearing law and order problems, the Centre has asked states to strengthen security to prevent attempts by any element to disturb peace after the Allahabad High Court gives its verdict on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit. Meanwhile, the Home Ministry has prepared a contingency plan,
particularly for Uttar Pradesh, to deal with any situation arising out of the court order.

In an advisory, the Home Ministry has asked all states and Union Territories to give maintaining law and order "top most priority" as the judgement, expected sometime in the second half of September, has the potential to "evoke sharp reactions".

In its communication, the Ministry also informed states and UTs of the activities of various religious groups which have already announced a countrywide mass mobilisation and awareness campaign in view of the forthcoming court verdict.

Maintaining that the court verdict "is likely to evoke sharp reactions and communal passions among both Hindus and Muslims depending on the way the judgement goes", the Ministry asked states and UTs to keep a close watch on activities of religious bodies of both the communities in the run-up to the judgement.
 
Tread with caution on Babri: Advani to party MPs




With the verdict on the Ayodhya title suit expected this month, senior BJP leader L K Advani on Tuesday asked party MPs to "exercise caution" while making statements on the sensitive issue.

"On Ayodhya, L K Advani has asked MPs not to make statements which are against national interest... As a national political party, we should make statements by exercising caution when the verdict is delivered," BJP deputy leader in Rajya Sabha S S Ahluwalia said. He was briefing reporters on proceedings of the BJP parliamentary party meeting.

The Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court is likely to deliver the verdict soon.

Meanwhile, Leader of Opposition in Rajya Sabha Arun Jaitley said the BJP would launch an agitation on the issue of enemy properties in the country. "While we supported a bill on enemy properties based on the ordinance promulgated by the government, we are opposed to any amendments aimed at benefiting an individual... we have already voiced our fears that government could issue a fresh ordinance based on amendments," Ahluwalia said.

Out of 2,100 enemy properties in the country, 1,400 are located in Uttar Pradesh, he said, adding, "Out of the 1,400, 1,100 belong to Raja of Mehmudabad," he said.

During the meeting, which was also attended by BJP chief Nitin Gadkari, Advani expressed "satisfaction" on the role of party MPs during the monsoon session which ended on Tuesday. "He expressed satisfaction at BJP's role in protesting and supporting bills keeping in mind national interest," Ahluwalia said, adding that Gadkari too "appreciated" the contribution of MPs during the over month-long session.

The BJP also plans to tap the estimated 82 crore workers in the unorganised sector. Gadkari told MPs about plans to set up an organisation of workers of the sector to be christened Bharatiya Janata Kamgar Sangh. It will be launched on September 25 to mark the birth anniversary of Deen Dayal Upadhyay.

Read more: Tread with caution on Babri: Advani to party MPs - India - The Times of India http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...rty-MPs/articleshow/6469674.cms#ixzz0yF09GC7I
 
Its all bs mate nothing will happen to those ppl that did that. Those ppl are living freely and will continue to do so no matter how much proof you show the world.
 
i afraid from communal riots.
i guess of communal riots will gonna to happen after judgement..
 
whatever will be justice,but it will affect comman man life i think.
 
Last edited:
OMG!! Lot of blood has been already been spilled over this and more will be after judgement. So much for something that actually makes no difference to the common man. Bloody politics this !!
 
Ayodhya verdict like a semi-final: Pillai

Two days before the court pronounces its verdict in the Ayodhya land title suit, Union Home Secretary Gopal K Pillai on Tuesday said the verdict was "more like a semi-final" and indicated that the hour at which the judgment is delivered on September 24 would be crucial in preventing any kind of law and order problems. "This is more like a semi-final. The High Court judgment comes out on Friday afternoon. It is very well-timed after 3.30 pm so that the Friday prayers are over. Saturday and Sunday are holidays and it is only on Monday that one can go to the Supreme Court and get a stay. By the time you really decide what you want to do, you are back to status quo," Pillai said, speaking at a dinner hosted by the Observer Research Foundation and Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey in the Capital.

"India has moved on from 1992. The scenario is totally different from what it was in 1992. People have shown much maturity now. I have seen from the comments made by the Hindu as well as the Muslim groups," the Home Secretary added.

Pillai also spoke about Kashmir and blamed "vested interests" behind the current volatile situation in the Valley. "I keep telling people that why was it in Jammu and Kashmir there was a violent eruption now when for the first time you had a more successful Amarnath Yatra which brought lakhs of Hindu pilgrims into the state, providing tremendous employment to the locals," he said.

"You also had a tourist influx into J&K which is almost 85 per cent higher than the previous year. In March, April and May, you could not get a hotel room in Srinagar. You had all your hotels and restaurants full. You had taxi services running at full capacity all over Kashmir. And then suddenly in June you have the violent eruption. As things improve, there are, in one sense, vested interests who don't want things to improve."

On the internal armed movements in the country, mainly Naxalism, Pillai said, "There the real challenge for us is not really the ideological premise of liberation by armed might. The real challenge for us is really improving our governance. We just don't have governance in many of these areas. The state has moved away for a variety of reasons and the vacuum has been filled up by the CPI (Maoists)."
 
nat.jpg
 
OMG!! Lot of blood has been already been spilled over this and more will be after judgement. So much for something that actually makes no difference to the common man. Bloody politics this !!

shouldnt we stop being frustrated over this as its a usual thing now?? Has somebody tried to find answer of how come people from east india company happened to rule india for 100 years?? seriously our people are untrainable.
 
Last edited:
We will get to see how secular India really is when the verdict comes out. By the way, how many people were charged/arrested for desecrating and tearing down the mosque?
 
The govt should build a free public medical clinic on these premises so that Hindu/Muslim/Christians/Buddhist and every deserving citizen could get advantage.
 
Verdict should be

Clean the entire area and create a "naana naani Park" where people from every religion can come have have some fresh air :)
 
Build a mosque and Temple side by side ....Surely that would be common sense!!
 
Whatever they decide, they better NOT decide in one party's favor or the other, regardless who was right or who was wrong!
 
Whatever they decide, they better NOT decide in one party's favor or the other, regardless who was right or who was wrong!
This case was filed 60 years back. After 60 years do you think any court or any govt will allow the verdict in favor of any one party ? :)

I doubt either it will be a compromise kind or favor towards muslim. Personally I feel that should be the way.

None of us or our fore-fathers seen or remembered a temple there. Even if it was there its too old story to create tention.

I am very positive that Indians have moved on and can't expect too much disturbances after the verdict. (few exceptions excluding)
 
I say turn it into a stadium for CWG...



on second thought, maybe thats not such a good idea.
 
I say turn it into a stadium for CWG...



on second thought, maybe thats not such a good idea.
:))) :)))

Definitely not.

If you rearrange the letters in "SIR U MADE LAKHS" you get "SURESH KALMADI" :))
 
Due very soon - BBC reporting high security - hope no blood is shed.
 
Decision should have been announced 30 mins ago.

200,000 army personnel on standby!!
 
I think people are expecting too much from this verdict.

There are several cases and some will go one way and some the other. Moreover, just heard on an Indian news channel that each of the three judges can give different judgements - yes that's useful.

It's mad. Half a century later and millions spent and we still won't get a clear cut verdict.

Just give the land to the scientologists and let this be done with.
 
What is "madder" is that lives of innocents will be effected and lost due to these decisions!

Simply declaring the site of hisorical importance and leaving it as such would have done the job.

My bigger issue is that the precedence set by this ruling may well apply to many other sites in India.
 
What is "madder" is that lives of innocents will be effected and lost due to these decisions!

Simply declaring the site of hisorical importance and leaving it as such would have done the job.

My bigger issue is that the precedence set by this ruling may well apply to many other sites in India.

Which is why no clear cut ruling will be made. Politically it's suicide.

Some sort of middle ground ruling where both parties can then go back to the courts for another few decades is ideal for the authorities.
 
1/3 of the land to be set aside for a Mosque, 1/3 of the land for a Temple.

Not sure what happens to the rest of it.
 
Use the remaining 1/3 for a municipal waste disposal. That will vacate the whole site.
 
I guess they'll be taking to the streets of Pakistan and setting fire to....innocent peoples cars, shops, houses?
 
this is verdict

Allahabad High Court verdict on Ayodhya title suits out | The ownership of the disputed site is to be divided into three parts: the site of the Ram lala idol to Ram, Nirmohi Akhara gets Sita Rasoi and Ram Chabuta
 
Babri Mosque verdict given in favour of Hindus

AYODHYA: The Allahabad High Court has announced its verdict on the Ayodhya Babri Mosque case, ruling in favour of the Hindus.

According to the decision, the land will be split three ways, two parts of which will be used for the temple while the third part can be used to build a mosque.

Earlier, more than 200,000 police officials were deployed across India and temporary jails were set up as the government prepared for possible Hindu-Muslim riots.

The government had also appealed for calm once the court gave its verdict.

From the capital New Delhi to the financial hub Mumbai, many Indians stayed home ahead of the decision and stocked up on food in apprehension of the verdict.

However, commentators said the verdict is unlikely to spark widespread riots that hit Mumbai and other cities in 1992.

Political parties had also called for calm and there is little electoral headway to be made in egging on religious riots in post-economic reform India.

Armed police set up checkpoints across Ayodhya, which had a deserted feel, guarded Muslim homes, a roughly 3,000 people minority in the town of 70,000 inhabitants.

Wary of these two sides being provoked into fighting, the government had banned bulk mobile text messaging nationally to prevent the spread of rumors and religious extremism.

:inti
-
http://tribune.com.pk/story/56692/babri-mosque-verdict-given-in-favour-of-hindus/
 
Irresponsible from tribune pk .... the official verdict is still not out yet .... Its just the lawyers of Hindu Mahasabha , claiming their victory ... Official copy is not available yet....
 
The decision is by majority verdict!!.... 2 hindu judges vs 1 muslim judge is it?
 
Senior advocate and BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad emerged from court today to say that the three-judge bench had ruled in a majority judgement 2:1, that one-third part of the disputed land should be given to the Sunni Waqf Board, one-third to the Nirmohi Akhara and one-third to the party for 'Ram Lalla'. Prasad represents one of the litigants.

Hmmm this is going to be acrimonious to say the least......

source: NDTV
 
Its not in favor of any party. there were 3 parties who had claim on the site and have been told to divide it. All 3 have legitimate claim and deserve the land.

even Muslim law board of India is happy with the verdict :asif
 
I support the verdict.

All three has ligitimate claim and hence the verdict asks them to devide it in 3 and use. No one wins and no one lost.

I can't expect any better verdict.
 
A prejudiced verdict taken while ignoring the historical background & emotional attachment specifically of Indian Muslims. A shame and will be remembered as a unjust judgment.
 
I demand 1/3rd for us xians for being in the midst of this dogfight :moyo


.
 
Last edited:
3 hisson mey taqseem is what I briefly read on GEO.
 
I am watching news channels and seems maulanas from different cities (kolkata and some other place) saying they had even accepted this verdict before judgement.

So good news for India as both major sides are happy with the judgement.
 
A prejudiced verdict taken while ignoring the historical background & emotional attachment specifically of Indian Muslims. A shame and will be remembered as a unjust judgment.

Indian muslim boards seem happy.. wonder what is hurting you :wasim
 
A prejudiced verdict taken while ignoring the historical background & emotional attachment specifically of Indian Muslims. A shame and will be remembered as a unjust judgment.

Are you kidding me? What about the "historical background and emotional attachment" of the place to Hindus? It has been considered sacred to Hindus for millennia, from before Islam even existed as a religion, as the birthplace of Lord Rama. The Archeological Society of India's Supreme Court-ordered excavations confirmed that a temple structure existed in the location that predated the mosque, i.e. it had been razed and been replaced with a mosque during the invasion. Imagine if the crusaders had destroyed the holiest Muslim shrine and built a church on top of it. Would you not attempt to rebuild the mosque, or would you rather defer to the sensibilities and sensitivities of Christians?
 
hahaha it seems our ancestors were far more tolerant than us. It was established by all the three judges that Hindus and Muslims both simultaneously prayed in the inner courtyard of the disputed site for centuries ....
 
hahaha it seems our ancestors were far more tolerant than us. It was established by all the three judges that Hindus and Muslims both simultaneously prayed in the inner courtyard of the disputed site for centuries ....

unbelievable, isn't it?

21st century and still people drawing lines in the sand.
 
I claim the Delhi parliment is made on the grounds where my ancestors were born 2000 years ago!

While its good that both Hindus and Muslims get something, from a legal standpoint, it opens up a can of worms. Anyone can start claiming land from like thousands of years ago
 
Hindu extremists had warned that the court decision would not be accepted if the decision went against them, they would accept the decision ONLY if it's in their favour. The decision is in their favour so obviously they are happy.
Muslims will appeal against the decision but they know they have no chance so they need to accept that it was OK for bunch of hindus to destroy a mosque in shameful manner.
 
^^ You are cooking things now. No one said anything like that. Neither Hindu fundamentalist, not Muslim fundamentalists.

The society has changed now and both the parties now know that their is no political cake that they can bake out of this now ....
 
It not related to Pakistan in any way so therefore i honestly couldnt care less about the verdict whichever way it went.
 
Are you kidding me? What about the "historical background and emotional attachment" of the place to Hindus? It has been considered sacred to Hindus for millennia, from before Islam even existed as a religion, as the birthplace of Lord Rama. The Archeological Society of India's Supreme Court-ordered excavations confirmed that a temple structure existed in the location that predated the mosque, i.e. it had been razed and been replaced with a mosque during the invasion. Imagine if the crusaders had destroyed the holiest Muslim shrine and built a church on top of it. Would you not attempt to rebuild the mosque, or would you rather defer to the sensibilities and sensitivities of Christians?

History points otherwise. Ayodhia was not mentioned as an holy site for the Hindus in Hindu books from the 15-16th century. Tulsidas also did not mention it.

And no I did not say this, it was history professors in India that said this.
 
Biased.
Whatever it was before india was made has nothing to do with india today.
I think they should destroy whole india and make things which were built there the first time.
 
^^ You are cooking things now. No one said anything like that. Neither Hindu fundamentalist, not Muslim fundamentalists.

The society has changed now and both the parties now know that their is no political cake that they can bake out of this now ....

Cooking things??I don't know what are you on about but it was all over Indian media before the verdict. VHP and RSS members had absolutely no doubt that the decision would go in their favour and they would not accept decision against them.
 
The Land is divided into 3 parts:
1/3 to Waqf board,
1/3 to Nirmohi Akhara
1/3 to Ram Lalla

The main disputed part of (the central area) site is declared as birth place of Lord Ram, and hence place for temple there.

But as expected the case will be appealed in Supreme court and another 10 yrs b4 final verdict comes.
 
BJP and VHP are lighting fire crackers in some places. That gives you an idea who the verdict favoured.
 
Cooking things??I don't know what are you on about but it was all over Indian media before the verdict. VHP and RSS members had absolutely no doubt that the decision would go in their favour and they would not accept decision against them.

Link ?
 
Are you kidding me? What about the "historical background and emotional attachment" of the place to Hindus? It has been considered sacred to Hindus for millennia, from before Islam even existed as a religion, as the birthplace of Lord Rama. The Archeological Society of India's Supreme Court-ordered excavations confirmed that a temple structure existed in the location that predated the mosque, i.e. it had been razed and been replaced with a mosque during the invasion. Imagine if the crusaders had destroyed the holiest Muslim shrine and built a church on top of it. Would you not attempt to rebuild the mosque, or would you rather defer to the sensibilities and sensitivities of Christians?

I think he wants it the way it used to be when a mass murder called Aurangzeb used to run the show.....
 
Kooll down guys about the judgement which politically given the verdict of secular India trying to appease all.

Logical point is if Rama existed as Lord then he wouldnt have allowed his place of worships to get destroyed by Babar in 1528 as claimed.
If Allah existed as Lord then he wouldnt have allowed his place to be destroyed by Kar sevaks in 1992.

Verdict - divide the land equally and have fun. Common guys this could have been done long back. So whats the point in fighting.

Hope the common sense prevails to all the Hindus & Muslims who are bothered about this and in future they be sensible.
 
2 questions:

1) Its ok to say that Hindus won and Muslims lost?
Reason: Hindus before have no part of the land and now have 2/3 of the land. Muslims before have the whole land and now have only 1/3 of the land.

2) All the masjids in India can be destroyed like Barbari Masjid?
Reason: A precedence has been set.
 
Government should just take the land and make a strip club or something everyone can enjoy
 
very smart. make a 'neither here nor there' judgement so it is challenged in the Supreme Court. That buys you another 10-15 years.
 
2 questions:

1) Its ok to say that Hindus won and Muslims lost?
Reason: Hindus before have no part of the land and now have 2/3 of the land. Muslims before have the whole land and now have only 1/3 of the land.

2) All the masjids in India can be destroyed like Barbari Masjid?
Reason: A precedence has been set.

1. In the same vein Hindus lost and Muslims won when the land fell into the Muslim power?

2. Only if those mosques were built over temples. Is that the case?
 
2 questions:

1) Its ok to say that Hindus won and Muslims lost?
Reason: Hindus before have no part of the land and now have 2/3 of the land. Muslims before have the whole land and now have only 1/3 of the land.

2) All the masjids in India can be destroyed like Barbari Masjid?
Reason: A precedence has been set.


Thats utterly simplistic. I can do the same: Before 1528, or whenever, Muslims had none of the land, and Hindus had all the land. Now Muslims have 1/3 and Hindus 2/3. Hindus should therefore be unhappy????

Its waaay more complicated than what you are trying to come up with. All that has happened is that the verdict was made to try and please everyone. No one was going to be entirely happy. In trying to make a compromise, no side has won entirely, and by trying to stick numbers on, people are trying to say which side won.

A precedent has not been set. Babri Masjid was a special case, as land where there was a temple, which incidentally, all three of the judges (yes the muslim one too) agreed that there was, and a specially revered holy site by Hindus, had a mosque built on it. Not every mosque in India is built on the birthplace of a hindu deity. As a muslim, I don't really see why a mosque should be specifically built there, and only there. Wheras I can understand that Hindus venerate the place, and there is a reason why they want that particular piece of land.

With Mathura and Varanasi, temples exist along side the mosques, which again were built on the site of previously destroyed temples. They have just applied the same solution here. Even though the Sunni Waqf board and the Hindu Mahasabha have challenged the decision, I don't see it changing. It would be political suicide.

Although the problem I have is there is no hint of justice being applied when it comes to Advani and his Karsevaks. No matter what, they comitted a crime, and need to face the consequences.

And I hope is that we don't see a repeat of the violence in Pakistan which occured in 1992.

very smart. make a 'neither here nor there' judgement so it is challenged in the Supreme Court. That buys you another 10-15 years.

Not really. Any judgement was going to be challenged.
 
Last edited:
"Mandir-Masjid bair karate, Mel karati Madhushala
Mandir-Masjid door bhagate, Pas bulati Madhushala
Mandir-Masjid-Girja tonde, Unhen jodati Madhushala"

-- Harivansh Rai Bachchan


Lines written 75 years back, still so much apt!
 
ozymandias and Zahid87,

Regarding the 1st point, I was not talking in historical context. I was talking whats happening now and hindus appears to be the winners and muslims the losers. Now if this is right or wrong in historical context is another matter.

Regarding the 2nd point, I was assuming that any masjid in India can be preceived to be built on a temple. Yes or No? Then the masjid needs to be destroyed and then it can be proven that it was built on a temple. Yes or No? And if it is proven that it was not built on a temple then what will happen? I mean in Barbari Majid case it was destroyed before it was proven that it was built on a temple. Right? Thats the precedence I was talking about.
 
Last edited:
Thats utterly simplistic. I can do the same: Before 1528, or whenever, Muslims had none of the land, and Hindus had all the land. Now Muslims have 1/3 and Hindus 2/3. Hindus should therefore be unhappy????

Its waaay more complicated than what you are trying to come up with. All that has happened is that the verdict was made to try and please everyone. No one was going to be entirely happy. In trying to make a compromise, no side has won entirely, and by trying to stick numbers on, people are trying to say which side won.

A precedent has not been set. Babri Masjid was a special case, as land where there was a temple, which incidentally, all three of the judges (yes the muslim one too) agreed that there was, and a specially revered holy site by Hindus, had a mosque built on it. Not every mosque in India is built on the birthplace of a hindu deity. As a muslim, I don't really see why a mosque should be specifically built there, and only there. Wheras I can understand that Hindus venerate the place, and there is a reason why they want that particular piece of land.

With Mathura and Varanasi, temples exist along side the mosques, which again were built on the site of previously destroyed temples. They have just applied the same solution here. Even though the Sunni Waqf board and the Hindu Mahasabha have challenged the decision, I don't see it changing. It would be political suicide.

Although the problem I have is there is no hint of justice being applied when it comes to Advani and his Karsevaks. No matter what, they comitted a crime, and need to face the consequences.

And I hope is that we don't see a repeat of the violence in Pakistan which occured in 1992.



Not really. Any judgement was going to be challenged.

well India is only 60 years old (please don't give me thousands of years bc that aint true...INDIA as in today is 60 years old...the 'secular' country that it speaks of is 60 yrs old...so in that light...muslims had the mosque in 1947...and it was under INDIAN GOVT that this mosque was destroyed and its the responsibility of INDIAN GOVT as a secular nation to restore it...what happ 2000 years ago is not the business fo the SECULAR INDIAN GOVT

PER YOUR THINKING...we americans should leave America and give the land back to the red indians...come on now this is the 21st century you can't bring in BS that took place 1000 years ago
 
The idea that Hindu's and Muslims should worship together is ingorant and delusional.

This verdict has set a dangerous precident. Now facist Hindu's will look to gain other sites from Muslims.

Can anyone show me the evidence that 'Lord ' Ram even existed?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top