scorecardresearch
Thursday, March 28, 2024
Support Our Journalism
HomeJudiciaryAs Ram Mandir construction begins, 28-yr-old Babri demolition trial could miss deadline...

As Ram Mandir construction begins, 28-yr-old Babri demolition trial could miss deadline again

SC has given Lucknow special court hearing the case until 31 August to pronounce judgment — the 3rd such deadline. But lawyers say process is far from complete.

Follow Us :
Text Size:

New Delhi: As Prime Minister Narendra Modi prepares to lay the foundation stone for the Ram Mandir in Ayodhya, the 28-year-old Babri Masjid demolition trial is still going on in a special court in Lucknow.

The Supreme Court, had in November last year, put an end to the long-standing Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suit, ruling in favour of the Hindu parties and ordering that the disputed 2.77 acres of land be handed over to a trust to be set up by the Centre for the construction of the Ram Mandir.

But the criminal trial for the demolition of the Babri Masjid has lingered on for nearly three decades due to several reasons — from technical issues and delay in proceedings due to two separate trials going on, to the case being caught between the trial court and the Allahabad High Court for a decade — until the Supreme Court finally said let “justice be done though the heavens fall” in 2017. Since then, the top court has set three deadlines for the trial court, the latest of which is 31 August this year.

And yet, lawyers involved in the case say the trial court is set to miss the deadline again.


Also read: How India can prevent another Babri Masjid demolition


Two FIRs

In December 1992, two FIRs were filed — one against lakhs of kar sevaks, accused of dacoity, robbery, causing hurt, injuring/defiling places of public worship, promoting enmity between two groups on the grounds of religion, etc. Section 120B (criminal conspiracy) was also added to this FIR.

A second FIR was filed against 8 people — L.K. Advani, Ashok Singhal, Vinay Katiyar, Uma Bharti, Sadhvi Ritambhara, Murli Manohar Joshi, Giriraj Kishore and Vishnu Hari Dalmia. Of these eight, Singhal, Kishore and Dalmia have since died.

This FIR alleged offences under Sections 153-A (promoting enmity between two groups on grounds of religion), 153-B (imputations, assertions prejudicial to national integration) and 505 (statements conducing public mischief) of the Indian Penal Code.

Section 11 of the Code of Criminal Procedure requires that a state government must consult its respective high court before constituting a special court to hear a case or a set of cases. So, the Uttar Pradesh government consulted with the Allahabad High Court for constituting a special court in Lucknow to hear the case against unknown kar sevaks. This case was assigned to the CBI for investigation.

The second FIR, against the eight persons, was to be heard by a special court in Rae Bareli, and investigated by the state CID.

In 1993, another notification was issued, directing that the second FIR against the eight accused should also be tried by the same special court in Lucknow. The two FIRs were clubbed together. However, this time, the state government had not consulted with the high court.

In 1996, the special court in Lucknow, on the basis of charge sheets filed by the CBI, observed that there was prima facie evidence to frame charges of criminal conspiracy against the leaders, including Advani.


Also read: Babri Masjid demolition trial is a textbook example of how delayed justice can be


Caught between lower court & high court for 10 years

The case remained caught between the trial court and the Allahabad High Court from 2001 to 2010.

In 2001, Advani, Uma Bharti and other leaders challenged the trial court order framing charges of criminal conspiracy against them in the high court. This was on the basis of a procedural lapse — that the state government did not consult with the high court according to the CrPC before clubbing the FIRs.

The accused won the case, got the criminal conspiracy charges dropped, and the case was tried separately in Rae Bareli again.

In 2003, the Rae Bareli court discharged Advani, at the time the deputy prime minister and Union home minister, saying there wasn’t enough evidence against him. But in 2005, the Allahabad High Court stepped in again, restarting trial against Advani and others, but without the charges of criminal conspiracy.

In 2010, the high court also upheld the lower court order that separated the two trials and dropped the criminal conspiracy charges against Advani and other leaders.


Also read: ‘Too complicated for video trial’, 27-year-old Babri case likely to miss deadline again


‘Let justice be done though the heavens fall’

In April 2017, the Supreme Court fast-tracked the case. It had been approached by the CBI in 2011, challenging the 2010 Allahabad High Court judgment and demanding a common trial of all the cases. The CBI had also argued for a revival of the criminal conspiracy charges against the accused.

The apex court used its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution to hold that the technical infirmity of absence of formal consultation would not stand in the way of the trial, and directed that the cases be clubbed together and heard by the special court in Lucknow. It also revived the criminal conspiracy charges against several accused, including Advani, Bharti, Joshi and 18 others.

Article 142 allows the Supreme Court to pass any order “necessary for doing complete justice”. In its 2017 judgment, the court described the powers under Article 142 by a maxim, “let justice be done though the heavens fall”.

It then granted the Lucknow court two years to complete the trial, end on 19 April 2019. In July 2019, the Supreme Court extended the tenure of the judge hearing the case, and extended the deadline by another nine months, until April 2020.

In May this year, the top court fixed 31 August 2020 as the new deadline, and also suggested that the judge can use video-conferencing facilities to complete the proceedings amid the Covid-19 pandemic.


Also read: Ayodhya verdict & Babri demolition confirmed status of Muslims as second-class citizens


Two stages left

Advocate Abhishek Ranjan, who is representing Advani, M.M. Joshi and Kalyan Singh explained the process of the trial.

“Once the investigating agency submits the charge sheet, the court takes cognisance and summons the accused. The prosecution’s evidence is then put forth and examined. After this examination, the accused persons are examined by the court under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,” Ranjan said.

Section 313 states that in every trial, the court can ask the accused to explain any “circumstances appearing in the evidence against him”.

Ranjan continued: “After recording their answers to these questions, the court then asks the accused to present their defence. Post this, the court hears the arguments from the prosecution and the defence. The judgment is then delivered.”

Currently, the case has two steps of the process left to complete. Until now, 31 of the 32 surviving accused, including Advani, Joshi, Kalyan Singh, Uma Bharti, Katiyar and Champat Rai (now general secretary of the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra Trust), have recorded their final statements under Section 313. One of the lesser-known accused is absconding.

The prosecution has also examined a total of 351 witnesses, of which 57 were examined in Rae Bareli and the remaining in Lucknow.

On 31 July, the court gave the accused a week’s time to say if they want to present their defence. But according to a court order passed on 4 August, only Kalyan Singh had submitted his application to present a defence.

The court gave the others time until 5 August to inform it whether they want to present their defence, and provided the former UP CM time until 7 August to submit the evidence. Then, the arguments stage will begin.


Also read: What happens to Babri criminal trial against Advani, others after SC condemns demolition


‘Judge adamant, but practically difficult to meet deadline’

Two other lawyers involved in the Babri demolition trial told ThePrint that it would be extremely difficult for the court to finish these remaining stages and deliver the judgment by the 31 August deadline.

“The court is adamant (on wanting to meet the deadline). But practically speaking, even if no defence is present and the arguments start, merely writing the judgment would require at least a month,” one lawyer, who did not wish to be identified, said.

The other lawyer, who represents the opposing side, added: “The proceedings have gone on for over 25 years, with thousands of documents involved and statements recorded. To deal with them, the judge would need at least 20 or 30 days. So I don’t think the judgment would be pronounced by 31 August.”


Also read: Ayodhya through the ages: A timeline of Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute


 

Subscribe to our channels on YouTube, Telegram & WhatsApp

Support Our Journalism

India needs fair, non-hyphenated and questioning journalism, packed with on-ground reporting. ThePrint – with exceptional reporters, columnists and editors – is doing just that.

Sustaining this needs support from wonderful readers like you.

Whether you live in India or overseas, you can take a paid subscription by clicking here.

Support Our Journalism

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Most Popular