The Ayodhya verdict did not uphold secularism… Why did the former Supreme Court judge say this?

New Delhi: Former Supreme Court judge and renowned jurist Justice RF Nariman has expressed disappointment over the apex court’s decision in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case. The former Supreme Court judge has said that the verdict in the Ayodhya case does not do justice to the principle of secularism. he/she also said that the Places of Worship Act upheld in the 2019 Ayodhya verdict should be strictly implemented so that ‘ Those who create disputes and communal tension at religious places, which come up every day, can be stopped.

Pakistan, Nepal, Bangladesh… now is the biggest test of Indian diplomacy.

Concern over the situation in the country

Delivering the inaugural lecture of the Ahmadi Foundation, set up in the memory of former CJI AM Ahmadi, Justice Nariman explained how special CBI judge Surendra Yadav, who acquitted all the accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case, got a post-retirement job as Deputy Lokayukta in Uttar Pradesh. Got it. Speaking on ‘Secularism and the Indian Constitution’ he/she said that this is the condition of this country.

After Maldives, China, now it is Bangladesh’s turn… How Modi’s Hanuman S takes the country out of difficult crisis. Jaishankar

‘It was a mockery of justice’

Referring to various orders passed by the apex court related to the decades-old dispute, he/she said that in my humble opinion, a huge travesty of justice was that secularism was not given its due in these judgments. The final verdict in this case was given by a bench of five judges on November 9, 2019. he/she disagreed with the logic given by the court for giving the disputed land for Ram temple despite considering the demolition of the mosque as illegal.

Places of Worship Act should not be made unconstitutional… Gyanvapi Masjid Committee appeals to the Supreme Court

a positive aspect of the decision

Referring to the 2019 judgement, Justice Nariman said it also had a positive aspect as it upheld the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, 1991. This has been dealt with in five pages of the order. Expressed displeasure over several lawsuits being filed across the country creating controversies over religious structures. he/she said the 1991 law should be implemented. Also, this judgment should be read in every trial court where cases are filed to claim religious places of other communities.

China border dispute: Atal’s initiative on which Modi is moving forward, local ‘James Bond’ will take command again

promote communal tension

Justice Nariman said that today we see that hydra heads are emerging all over the country. Cases are being filed everywhere against mosques as well as dargahs. In my view, all this can give rise to communal tension and disharmony and is contrary to what is said in the Constitution and the Places of Worship Act.

he/she said, “The only way to crush all these hydra heads is to implement these five pages of this judgment. It should be read in every district court and High Court. Because these five pages are a declaration from the Supreme Court which binds them all.