In a dramatic development, the Sunni Central Waqf Board, the main Muslim litigant in the Ayodhya case which claims ownership of the land where the Babri Masjid stood, filed an application in the Indian Supreme Court for settlement Wednesday, the last day of hearing in the Ayodhya case.
The application was filed through the three-member mediation panel of retired Supreme Court judge F.M.I. Khalifullah, who heads the panel; Sriram Panchu, advocate; and Sri Sri Ravishankar, founder Art of Living.
The Sunni Central Waqf Board informed the apex court, reported Frontline magazine, that it was willing to give up its claim on the title suit of the land provided it was given four guarantees:
* The government should give a guarantee that the status quo of all other religious places, where a dispute was going on, should be maintained as on August 15, 1947.
* The government should give Muslims permission to repair/renovate all other mosques in Ayodhya which were turning into rubble for want of upkeep at the moment.
* The Hindutva parties should drop their claim on the land in Mathura and Kashi where the Idgah Masjid and the Gyanvapi Masjid stand.
* The government should give a written undertaking that events like December 6, 1992, will not be repeated ever again.
According to sources in the Sunni Central Waqf Board, the proposal was now in front of the Supreme Court to take a view. Informed sources in the Waqf Board told Frontline, “We have to take a practical view of the matter. Even if the judgment was to come in our favor, is it possible that we will ever be able to offer prayer or build a mosque at that spot? Pragmatism demanded that we take a sensible approach to the issue, for the sake of peace and harmony in the country. That is why we decided to drop our claim on the land, provided these four guarantees are given to us.”
Interestingly, the mediation panel filed the application directly, without informing counsel representing either side. According to sources, apparently the Nirmohi Akhara, which is the third litigant in the title suit, and Ram Lalla Virajman (the deity) have also approved of the proposal.
The mediation panel had been set up by the Supreme Court earlier this year to explore the possibility of an out-of-court settlement. But its efforts had been stalled midway owing to the inflexible stand of all the parties concerned. But the Waqf Board reportedly expressed its willingness to start mediation again, and negotiations resumed last month. But the apex court continued its daily hearings, which concluded today after 40 days.
India’s top court on Wednesday ended hearings to settle the land title dispute between Muslims and Hindus over plans to build a Hindu temple on the site in northern India where Hindu hard-liners demolished a 16th century mosque in 1992, sparking deadly violence.
The five judges are expected to announce their verdict in mid-November.
They heard 14 petitions challenging a 2010 lower court ruling that 1.12 hectares (2.77 acres) of disputed land be partitioned among Hindus and Muslims.
The destruction of the mosque in Ayodhya, a town in the northern state of Uttar Pradesh, in 1992 sparked massive Hindu-Muslim violence that left 2,000 people dead.
The judges started day-to-day proceedings in August after mediation proceedings failed to find a compromise between the two communities.
Hindu hard-liners say they want to build a new temple to Hindu god Ram on the site, which they revere as his birthplace. They say the mosque was built after a temple dedicated to the Hindu god was destroyed by Muslim invaders.
Prime Minister Narendra Modi had promised to build the temple in 2014 elections that brought him to power. But he later decided to wait for the court verdict despite pressure from millions of Hindu hard-liners who asked his government to bring legislation to build the temple.
Authorities on Saturday banned the assembly of more than four people at one place and deployed additional police and paramilitary forces in and around Ayodhya, 550 kilometers (350 miles) east of New Delhi, to prevent any attacks by Hindu activists on Muslims, who comprise 6 percent of the town’s more than 55,500 people.
After the demolition of the mosque in 1992, Hindus and Muslims took the issue to a lower court, which in 2010 ruled that the disputed land should be divided into three parts — two for Hindus and one for Muslims.
That was challenged in the Supreme Court by the two communities represented by Hindu Maha Sabha , the Sunni Waqf Board and the Nirmohi Akhara .
