Dropping names

MEANWHILE, hearing is yet to be completed in another case involving a report submitted by the Archaeological Survey of India ASI. In 2003, the court had sought to resolve the temple row by ordering an excavation at the Babri Masjid site to determine whether a Hindu temple ever existed there.

The ASI conducted its excavations from March 12 to August 7, 2003. The report was submitted in August 2003. However, four sets of objections were filed against the report.

After hearing lengthy arguments, the court in February 2005 said, 8216;8216;the ASI report does not make any categorical mention about the existence of any temple at the site of Babri Masjid.

The court will consider the ASI report and objections against the same at the time of the final hearing of the case, in light of evidence which have already been produced or may be produced by the parties involved8217;8217;.

THE attack on the Babri Masjid in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992, changed the face of Indian politics. It8217;s a day that has never left political and public consciousness. It all started in 1991 when the UP government led by the BJP acquired 2.65 acres to develop some facilities for pilgrims.

The acquisition was challenged by several writ petitions and after five days of the demolition of Babri Masjid, the court on December 12, 1992, quashed the notifications of acquisition.

On January 7, 1993, the central government promulgated an Ordinance and simultaneously a reference was made by the President to the Supreme Court for its opinion on the issue8212;8216;8216;whether there ever existed any religious structure at the site in question8217;8217;. The Ordinance was replaced by an Act of Parliament.

The Act was challenged and suits were filed in the Lucknow Bench of the High Court by Hafiz Mohd Akhlaq and Akshay Brahamchari. Even Jami-a-tul Ulema filed a writ against this Act. Deciding the cases, the Lucknow bench on October 24, 1994, quashed the presidential reference. Other suits were remitted to the High Court.

Hearing in these writs started in 1996 and evidence of the 8216;Muslim side8217; were completed in 2002 after an examination of 28 witnesses. Considering the delay in hearing, the court asked for a day-to-day hearing, appointing a Commissioner for recording statements of witnesses.

TODAY, the site of contention is silent. No religious activity is allowed on any portion of the acquired land that measures about 76.703 acres. Besides, no part of the land can be handed over by the government to anyone.

From a religious site Ayodhya has now transformed into a site of curiosity. Many of the pilgrims troop in to get a feel of the December 6 incident. And they are not disappointed.

The trenches that the ASI has dug for excavation, the policemen that still guard Ayodhya, are all grim reminders of that Day in December.