Ayodhya Verdict - Faith Conquers All

The Supreme Court’s leap of faith in the Ayodhya Case will bear fruit only if the government implements the verdict fairly by bringing together all stakeholders and working out a broad political and federal consensus

- Sachidananda Murthy

The poet always wanted temples to be built of love, and now, 91 years after those words were penned, the Supreme Court of India wants stones of love to be used to build a temple and a mosque in Ayodhya.

Drawing on the extraordinary powers given to it by the Constitution 69 years ago, a Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi delivered a judgment, which was noted both for its unanimity and imagination. The judgment, which showed triple leaps of faith, law, and logic, puts an end to a long-drawn dispute which has sundered the nation’s peace and equilibrium along religious and political lines for more than four centuries.

The leap of faith has delighted Hindu groups, which, over the years, have firmly articulated their widespread belief that Ram was born in the exact spot where a mosque came up in the 16th century, after demolishing a temple. The Muslims also granted that the disputed site was Ram’s birthplace. The court recognized faith as being central to this determination.

The leap of logic has come after concluding that the act of installing idols in the Babri Masjid in 1949 and the demolition of the mosque in 1992 were criminal acts, which deprived Muslims of their right to worship there. The court ordered the government to allow Muslims a five-acre plot in a prominent place in the city of Ayodhya, even as it ordered that a temple be built on the disputed site. But the plea based on adverse possession and the doctrine of lost grant made by Muslims groups was rejected. The court, however, granted them the right to have a mosque, but not in the same spot where the Babri Masjid existed.