Premium
This is an archive article published on August 21, 2019

Ayodhya hearing: Writings on recovered slab point to Vishnu temple at Babri site, SC told

Senior counsel C S Vaidyanathan, appearing for the deity, told a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi that the Sunni Wakf Board and others on the mosque side had disputed recovery of the slab but had not questioned its authenticity.

ayodhya case, ayodhya sc hearing, ayodhya dispute sc hearing, ayodhya title dispute case, ayodhya surpeme court, ayodhya hearing, ayodhya  news, india news Justice Chandrachud drew the counsel’s attention to the HC judgment linking the disputed site to the 12th century and sought to know how this was done.

Inscriptions on a stone slab “recovered” from the rubble of the demolished Babri Masjid in Ayodhya pointed to the existence of a 12th century Vishnu temple at the site of Babri Masjid, the counsel for Ramlalla told the Supreme Court on Tuesday.

Senior counsel C S Vaidyanathan, appearing for the deity, told a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi that the Sunni Wakf Board and others on the mosque side had disputed recovery of the slab but had not questioned its authenticity. He was responding to a query from the bench, also comprising Justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer. The bench is hearing appeals against the September 30, 2010 judgment of Allahabad High Court.

Justice Chandrachud drew the counsel’s attention to the HC judgment linking the disputed site to the 12th century and sought to know how this was done.

Story continues below this ad

Vaidyanathan replied that the slab was 115 cm long and 55 cm wide. The inscription on it was in classical Sanskrit and, as deciphered by epigraph expert K V Ramesh, spoke about the existence of a Vishnu Hari temple at the site in Ayodhya, which was the capital of Saketamandala kingdom ruled by King Govindachandra, the counsel said.

The temple was constructed in the 12th century, he said.

On doubts being raised about the recovery of the slab, Vaidyanathan said this was because the witness to the recovery was a reporter, Ashok Chandra Chatterjee, who worked with Panchajanya magazine, and others had doubted his statement by contending that the magazine was run by an organisation affiliated to the RSS.

The mosque side, Vaidyanathan submitted, had taken the stand that the recovery was doubtful. According to them, the slab was available in some museum and had been planted at the site, he added.

Story continues below this ad

Read | The other Ayodhya trial: Case against LK Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi, Uma Bharti is crawling

“Even assuming it was found in museum, it points to the existence of a temple…there is intrinsic evidence in the inscription about the existence of the temple in Ayodhya,” he said.

The bench then wanted to know whether any question was put to the witnesses — Ramesh and Chatterjee — regarding the authenticity of the inscriptions. Vaidyanathan replied that there was “no dispute with regard to authenticity of the inscription, correctness of the translation, or summary of contents”.

He referred to photographs of Babri Masjid taken in 1950 and said the particular slab was on the western wall but not very clearly visible, as it was stuck between other slabs.

Story continues below this ad

According to the reporter’s statement, he was at the spot when the mosque was demolished on December 6, 1992, and had seen the slab being recovered from the rubble. This slab was then moved to Ramkathakunj, and subsequently the police took custody, the counsel said, quoting him.

Vaidyanathan also referred to the testimony of some witnesses, including Muslims, to establish his case.

Vaidyanathan said that another witness, Mohammed Kasim Ansari, had said, “What I call Babri Masjid, they (Hindus) call Ramjanmabhoomi.” Even though the mosque was built, Hindus continued worshipping there, he added.

Ananthakrishnan G. is a Senior Assistant Editor with The Indian Express. He has been in the field for over 23 years, kicking off his journalism career as a freelancer in the late nineties with bylines in The Hindu. A graduate in law, he practised in the District judiciary in Kerala for about two years before switching to journalism. His first permanent assignment was with The Press Trust of India in Delhi where he was assigned to cover the lower courts and various commissions of inquiry. He reported from the Delhi High Court and the Supreme Court of India during his first stint with The Indian Express in 2005-2006. Currently, in his second stint with The Indian Express, he reports from the Supreme Court and writes on topics related to law and the administration of justice. Legal reporting is his forte though he has extensive experience in political and community reporting too, having spent a decade as Kerala state correspondent, The Times of India and The Telegraph. He is a stickler for facts and has several impactful stories to his credit. ... Read More

Stay updated with the latest - Click here to follow us on Instagram

Latest Comment
Post Comment
Read Comments
Advertisement
Loading Taboola...
Advertisement