babari masjid, communalism and sr bommai

just happened to read about the demolition of babri masjid, a very sad day in the modern history of our nation. Here are a few pertinent questions, the demolition raises?

1. If india is a secular country, why is it that the government remained a mute spectator to this brazen violation of religious right of minorities ie. the muslims. Would the Hinduz allow muslims to demolish say the brahideshwara temple or the jagganath puri temple, say becoz of certain dreams of allah being there inside the temple??
2. The fundamental right of religion enshrined in the constitution and the secularism that forms a part of the basic structure are they all only theoretical??
3. The Babri masjid kaand can be seen as the source of all communal turbulence that india has seen. This incident happened in 1991/2 ....following the Rajiv gandhi gvt policy of appeasement towards hindu post Shah bano verdict. He allowed the hindus to enter the mosque premises , which had so far been kept shut for all by the court (populism at play).
This gave wings to the hindu karsevaks and they demolished the mosque in the presence of 60000 paramilitary forces.

This hardcore violation of the already vulnerable rights of muslim population backfired resulting in 1993 mumbai bomb blasts. and then later burning of ayodhya train followed by gujarat riots.

Another interesting fallout of the babri kaand was on the nature of indian polity. The congress gvt that was in power at the centre dismissed 4 bjp led governments at the state level . Litigation followed. It was here that The supreme court gave the famous judgment of SR BOmmai case wherein it held the dismissal of state gvts legit (as the step was necessary to protect the secularism of our polity) and gave guidelines for imposition of presidents rule

The destruction of the Babri Masjid saw Central government dismiss four State governments lead by the BJP. In 1994, the challenge to this dismissal and earlier impositions of President’s Rule came to be decided by a nine-judge bench in the S.R. Bommai v. Union of India case.

S.R.Bommai Verdict is landmark judgement, where court discussed the provisions of Article 356 of the constitution and related issues.

This case has huge implications on centre state relations also.

1. It upheld the dismissal of the BJP governments to protect secularism, which was part of the Constitution’s basic structure

(Basic structure of the Constitution is protected, which include secularism as one of its unit)

2. It held that the President was required to act on objective material and that Article 356 could only be resorted to when there was a breakdown of constitutional machinery as distinguished from an ordinary breakdown of law and order.

(It clearly directed the President to follow due process and clarified the difference between Breakdown of constitutional machinery and Ordinary break down of law and order, thereby provided clarification and reduced the scope of discretion which can be used to achieve narrow political interests)

3. The court also held that in no case should a State Assembly be dissolved without Parliament approving the proclamation, and that a test of numerical strength could only be conducted on the floor of the Assembly and not outside it.

(It upholds the State legislative assembly as the place to decide the sanctity of the government and directed floor test must be conducted in Assembly, not outside

It also ensured accountability of the executive to the parliament in matter of imposition of president rule. Discretion of Exectuive is curbed due to need for parliamentary approval)

4. judgment ruled that an improperly dismissed government could be restored to office.

In this judgment Supreme Court showed signs of becoming a strong bulwark of constitutional right and propriety.

Now, Bommai doctrine is applied to protect states from discretion and political games of Central government

The doctrine in Bommai came to be applied by the Supreme Court in the Bihar case of Rameshwar Prasad & Ors v. Union of India .

t is very less known that Guru Dutt Singh, Faizabad city magistrate and K.K. Nayar, an administrator in the Indian Civil Services played key roles in the sequence of events that led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid- an event that changed the face of Indian politics forever.

This is a rough chronology of the events that are related to Babri Masjid:

• Ayodhya ('unconquerable" in Sanskrit) was the birth place of Lord Ram
• Mughal general Mir Banki builds the Babri Masjid in the Sixteenth century, under the rule of Mughal emperor, Babar.
• Edit: There isn't much that Hindus can do in the rule of the Mughals. Localized attempts continue to redeem the temple. The British try to pacify both sides. [for a more detailed account of the pre-1949 events, read Balaji Viswanathan's answer to Can someone explain the reasons for the Babri Masjid demolition?]
• Centuries later, India is freed from Mughal and British rule and becomes a free democracy.
• Ayodhya was home to a lot of sadhus (holy men). Abhiram Das, a sadhu told his disciples that he had a recurring dream that Ram made an appearance under the building’s central dome.
• Guru Dutt Singh found a soft corner for Abhiram Das, having had similar dreams himself. The two discussed how they could stealthily place a statue of an infant Ram in the muslim place of worship.
• With time, his conviction grew that the place should be amicably handed over by Muslims to the Hindus.
• He met K.K.Nayar, who belonged to Kerala. The two found common cause in  their reverence of Lord Ram and decided to take action. They used influence to get posted at Ayodhya at the same time.
• On the night of Dec. 22, 1949, they got a few sadhus access to the mosque (thanks to a Hindu guard at the mosque- a Hindu and a Muslim took guard in shifts) and placed a Ram Lalla (Infant statue of Ram) in the Mosque.
• Soon the word spread and worshipers from all over started flocking Ayodhya.
• Several governments passed and several Prime Ministers showed their disapproval (Especially Nehru who condemned what was happening in Ayodhya right from the start) but could not do much. “I am disturbed at developments at Ayodhya,” Nehru said in a telegram on Dec. 26, 1949, to Govind Ballabh Pant, chief minister of United Provinces.
• Hindus began to add more religions items in the Mosque and Muslims weren't welcome any more.
• <<several lawsuits, hearings and a couple of decades later>>
• Guru Dutt Singh and K.K. Nayar – the administrators who were instrumental in the idol’s placement — turned to politics. They played no further direct role in the Ayodhya dispute.
• Bharatiya Jana Sangh was formed-- a party that would go on to give birth to the sole challenger to the Congress monopoly- the BJP. Several other parties would also take birth- the Janata Dal, JD(U), BJD...
• In the 1980s, the Ayodhya dispute escalated from a local issue to a national one. It fed, and was fed by, other points of tension in Indian politics and society that set Hindus and Muslims on a collision course over the span of the decade. The Masjid gate was kept locked and was closed for common public.
• A woman named Shah Bano was granted alimony by the Supreme court, after divorce. The Muslims opposed it and demanded that Muslims be governed by the Sharia law. Rajiv Gandhi tried to introduce a law that provided for separate laws for Muslims. This angered Hindus-- the appeasement of Muslims. To appease the Hindus, in Feb 1986, he decided to unlock the gates of Babri Masjid to Ram devotees.
• The direct involvement of Rajiv Gandhi in these decisions remained debatable. Vir Bahadur Singh, the chief minister denied any involvement in the lock opening
• In May 1986, the government used its huge majority in Parliament to push through a law that effectively reversed the Shah Bano ruling and made it clear Muslim personal law would prevail.
• Instead of being appeased, both - Hindus and Muslims were given reasons to be outraged against each other and the government.
• Slowly, caught in Bofors controversy, Rajiv Gandhi lost momentum. In the meanwhile, by 1989, the VHP and BJP (Bharatiya Janata Party) had gained popularity. A foundation stone-laying ceremony for the Ram temple and around 2,75,000 Shriram Shilas (worshipped bricks) were brought in from around the country and around the world. The Hindus weren't going to be satisfied with just a temple 'near' the mosque while Muslims weren't going to be happy with their mosque being compromised.
• The BJP won 85 seats in the next elections, up from 2 in the previous. LK Advani gained prominence and he carried out rath yatraas (charriot processions) in an air conditioned bus made to look like a charriot- in 1990.
• In 1991 PV Narasimha Rao became the Prime Minister but the BJP formed the first non-congress govt. in UP.
• Dec. 6, 1992 was set as a date for karseva. Hindus from all over the country were motivated and stirred. The mosque’s destruction – though called for by many radicals in slogans and speeches – was not formally proposed
• Mr. Rao decided to dispatch more than 20,000 paramilitary personnel to Ayodhya’s surroundings just in case there was trouble.
• Hundreds of thousands flocked to Ayodhya on 6th December even as paramilitary forces stood by- as they were under strict orders to not use force.
• By evening the Babri Masjid was razed- even though Narasimha Rao had been promised by the Hindu forces that this wouldn't happen. The mosque was no more, after 450 years of existence. In the violence, several Muslims died and most fled Ayodhya for good.

This event led to the 1993 Mumbai blasts, the BJP coming to power in 1998, the burning of the Ayodhya train and the death of 60 karsevaks, the Gujarat riots and (edit: in some ways, the fueling of) the 2008 Mumbai attacks. One temple/Masjid in Ayodhya has led to the great divide between the two great religions of India. While most educated, sensible Hindus and Muslims have condemned both- the demolition of the mosque and the terror attacks, the issue continues to be used for gaining political mileage by both - Hindu and Muslim leaders. For years to come, this will continue to be India's past, present and future.