SC Bats For Out Of Court Settlement In Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Dispute, CJI Willing To Be Principal Negotiator

In a fresh attempt to end the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute, the Supreme Court of India has suggested that it should be settled through negotiation.

BCCL

"These are issues of religion and sentiments. These are issues where all the parties can sit together and arrive at a consensual decision to end the dispute. All of you may sit together and hold a cordial meeting."

Hearing a plea by BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, Chief Justice J S Khehar also said he was ready to sit down as a principal negotiator with the mediators chosen by parties to settle the disputes between Hindus and Muslims over the nearly century-old issue.

Welcoming the court's suggestion Union Culture Minister Mahesh Sharma said the Centre ¡°would love¡± to mediate between the two sides involved in the Ayodhya case.

BCCL/ File

BJP leader Vinay Katiyar said the Supreme Court has made the right assertion and that the UP government should be given time as it was fairly new.

"The Supreme Court has made the right assertion and we will move ahead in this regard. We have our government in Uttar Pradesh now and a pessimistic approach will now be initiated.I am confident that this matter will be solved."

The Congress said if both communities mutually agree to settle the matter out of court then it's the best way to maintain social harmony and peace. Congress spokesperson Randeep Surjewala said,

"Ram Mandir issue has been a medium to gain power for the last 25 years and also a reason of conflict between both communities in order to gain power. But if both parties mutually agree to settle the matter out of court then it's the best way to maintain social harmony and peace among the people of both the communities."

Madan Mohan Pandey, the representative of Ram Lalla Virajman said they will not negotiate over the land.

¡°If they come up with a proposal which is convenient for us, we can surely solve the dispute.¡±

The Muslim community, however, expressed apprehensions on out of court settlement on the dispute.

BCCL/File

"Let the court decide about the land and must give verdict accordingly. But there cannot be any solutions through talks. If it would have been so, things would have resolved long back," Gulzar Azmi, the Secretary of the Legal Cell of Jamiat-Ulema-e-Hind said.

Zafaryab Jilani, the convenor of the Babri Masjid Action Committee also expressed similar views.

"We cannot go for out of court settlement. What Swamy said does not matter. He is gaining publicity just like that as he has no locus standi and we do not want to give him any answer."

The All India Muslim Personal Law Board said that the time for negotiations is now over.

The two sides have been fighting a long standing legal battle ever since the demolition of Ayodhya's Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992, by a mob of Kar sevaks.

YouTube/ Screengrab

They claim that the 16th-century mosque was built on the place where Lord Ram was born.

In 2010, the Allahabad High Court had suggested that the disputed land should be a partitioned between the parties to the dispute.

The court recommended a three-way division of the disputed site between three parties, Ram Lalla 1/3 to be held by the Hindu Mahasabha, 1/3 for the Nirmohi Akhara and 1/3 to the Sunni Wakf Board.

AFP/ File

The suggestions were rejected by both the parties who took the fight to the Supreme Court.

The apex court's offer to mediate in the dispute also comes days after the BJP, which has for years led its political campaign on the Ram Janmabhoomi issue swept the UP assembly polls with a landslide margin.

Newly appointed state chief minister Yogi Adityanath has in the past on many occasions have raised the issue, especially in the run-up to the elections. He had then claimed that the construction of the Ram Temple will "start soon"

¡°Is there any force that can stop the construction of temple? When they could not stop the demolition of Babri Masjid, how can they stop you on this," Adityanath had told party workers in June 2016?