HVK Archives: Implementation of verdicts
Implementation of verdicts - The Statesman
K N Goyal
()
14 October 1996
Title : Implementation of verdicts
Author : K N Goyal
Publication : The Statesman
Date : October 14, 1996
Many politicians have been saying that they will abide by
the Court verdict on Ayodhya. This is easier said than
done. In this context one recalls a dispute between
Sunnis and Shias over certain plots in Mohalla Doshipura,
Varanasi. Litigations started in 1931. Shias won the
case, but Sunnis who were greater in number did not allow
implementation of the Court verdict. Every year on
Moharrum and Bara Wafat days prohibitory orders under
Section 144 CrPC are clamped aimed at preventing Shias
from reaping the fruits of the verdict. (In Lucknow also
on Moharrum, prohibitory orders on Alams are issued every
year and Shias make a formal protest by courting arrest.
Neither any Court nor the Government of any political
party has been able to solve the problem so far.)
Shias then filed writ petitions. Again and again, pro-
hibitory orders expired before a decision could be taken
and the petitions became in fructuous. The Supreme Court
passed orders in 1981 governing future years also. Even
then violent incidents continued to take place. The
Court was then called upon to issue further directives.
It appointed a committee of seven persons, headed by the
district magistrate and consisting of three representa-
tives of each community, to find a solution.
Predictably the six members were divided on communal
lines, while the D.M. agreed with Shias that two existing
graves belonging to Sunnis be removed from the plot.
Sunnis were neither agreeable to such shifting nor to
cordoning off the graves. They also objected to the
Court's jurisdiction in the matter and pleaded that
shifting the graves was contrary to their personal law.
The Shahi Imam's fatwa was also pressed into service.
The Court overruled their objections.
The decision of December 1983 could again not be imple-
mented by the authorities for several years and the Court
repeatedly expressed its displeasure over the weakness of
the executive authorities. I do not know how exactly
matters stand today.
The history of this dispute is a pointer to how things
can be expected to turn out over the implementation of a
Court verdict on Ayodhya. Doshipura was a local dispute
between two sub sects of Muslims, while Ayodhya is an
explosive dispute with national dimensions between two
major communities. Then the verdict itself may take
different forms.
Back
Top
|
