Ayodhya Verdict An ‘Order to Destroy the Masjid’, SC Lawyer Rajeev Dhavan

0
Supreme Court lawyer Rajeev Dhavan has said the Supreme Court’s recent verdict on Babri case was “effectively an order to destroy (masjid).” — File photo

The Jamiat Ulema-e-Hind filed the review petition on Ayodhya verdict in the Supreme Court on Monday.

Caravan News

NEW DELHI — Senior Supreme Court lawyer Rajeev Dhavan who represented the Babri Masjid side in the Ayodhya case has said the Supreme Court’s recent verdict was “effectively an order to destroy.” Criticising the verdict in strong terms, Dhavan said, “Had the masjid not been destroyed in 1992 and if it was still standing, the Supreme Court verdict amounted to a call, ‘Destroy it and move it out’.

Dhavan, who faced the ire of his community for representing the Muslim side in the case, was speaking at an event on ‘Constitution of India at 70’ organised by the Safdar Memorial Trust in New Delhi. In words laced with disappointment, he suggested that the Muslims of India “take the stones of the demolished Babri Masjid and get architects to build a great monument of injustice” – injustice that has been perpetrated on them.

He stressed that a Waqf property does not cease to be a Waqf property even if no prayer was held there.

Had the masjid not been destroyed in 1992 and if it was still standing, the Supreme Court verdict amounted to a call, ‘Destroy it and move it out’: Dhavan

The point that Muslims stopped praying in Babri Masjid for quite some time weighed heavily on the apex court while arriving at a decision on the Ayodhya land, the noted lawyer said, but asked as to why on earth would Muslims stop praying in a Masjid when a Muslim ruler held power.

On November 5, the Supreme Court passed the landmark verdict clearing the way for Hindus to construct a temple at the site in Ayodhya, where the mosque stood for centuries until it was demolished by a Hindu mob in December 1992.

Dhavan supported the idea of filing a review petition seeking reversal of the verdict and took a dig at those who stood against the review plea. “Can there be peace without justice,” he asked and added that compensating the Muslim side with the alternative five-acre land did not amount to justice.

For Dhavan, the closure in the dispute has not yet happened even as the verdict was passed. “There is still something to be done about the Babri Masjid case. This something is that which reflects in our secular mandate.”

Other than the Ayodhya verdict, advocate Dhavan spoke also on a wide range of legal and political issues. Watch the video to know more.

 

 

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here