Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind led by Maulana Mahmood Madani said it does not consider a review of Babri verdict as “rewarding” but does not oppose such a move
Abdul Bari Masoud | Caravan Daily
NEW DELHI — As more and more Muslim entities are coming forward to file review petitions against the Supreme Court verdict on Babri Masjid, a faction of the Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind led by Maulana Mahmood Madani said on Thursday it does not consider a review as “rewarding” but does not oppose such a move. The JUH working committee described the Babri Masjid judgement as “unjust and overwhelmingly one-sided” and termed it as “the darkest spot in the history of free India.”
Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind held its national working committee meeting on Thursday to discuss the Supreme Court verdict as the debate on filing a petition against gained momentum. A press statement issued by JUH said the meeting was held under the presidentship of Maulana Qari Mohammad Usman Mansoorpuri. “It discussed the option of a review petition against the verdict and of the offer to Muslims of a five acre plot as an alternative land for erecting a new mosque.
After extensive deliberations, the gathering of Islamic scholars, lawyers and experts passed resolutions on the verdict and on the mosques under the supervision of the Archaeological survey of India (ASI) as also about wakf properties.
The working committee reiterated that although the apex court has confirmed that the mosque was not built after demolishing any temple, it was clear that there existed a mosque for several hundred years. But its verdict on the mosque, the Babri Masjid, was seen by many as “unjust and overwhelmingly one-sided.”
It called the judgement “the darkest spot in the history of free India,” as it paved the way for construction of a temple over the mosque site. The meeting also discussed threadbare the possibility of filing review petitions. However, the meeting came to the conclusion that one cannot expect any better award from the court. Therefore, it felt the filing a review petitions “will not be beneficial to the community.” Rather, there is the possibility of further damage, the meeting felt.
“Nevertheless, if Muslim organisations availing their Constitutional rights decide to file review petitions, the Jamiat would not oppose them and it hopes that (May Allah Forbid) this will not produce any negative effect.” The Jamiat Ulama-i-Hind said it wanted to clarify that nothing could be a substitute to the demolished mosque. Therefore, the five-acre plot in an alternative place in Ayodhya as a substitute to the Babri mosque must not be accepted.”
The meeting also passed a resolution on mosques controlled by the Archaeological Survey of India, and called upon the government to order opening of these mosques for Namaz the soonest. “The Working Committee demands that these mosques be opened and Muslim faithful be allowed to offer prayers. The mosques controlled by the ASI are undisputed.”
In an oblique reference to the interference of the state government in the UP Sunni Central Waqf Board and the Shia Board, the Jamiat working committee stated that this was a matter of serious concern to the community that central and state governments were making undue interferences into the Wakf affairs. “The meeting, after due deliberations, has also noted that, as a result, the care-takers of Waqf properties take decisions that have a harmful effect on the Muslim community.”
The meeting equated the UP Sunni Waqf Board chairman Zufar Farooqui with the erstwhile Bengal Nawab Sirajudaullah’s army general Mir Jaafar, who had betrayed the Nawab at the Battle of Palasi. “In the Babri Mosque case, the chairman of the UP Sunni Waqf Board has played the role of Mir Jaafar, hurting the interests of the Muslims of India.”
Under these circumstances, the Working Committee decided to constitute a panel with advocate Shakil Ahmad Sayyad, Maulana Niaz Ahmad Farooqui, Hafiz Peer Shabbir Ahmad, Haji Mohammad Haroon and Hafiz NadeemSidiqui to look after the Waqf properties.