ASSEMBLY POLL '98
COMMENTARY
SPECIALS
INTERVIEWS
CAPITAL BUZZ
REDIFF POLL
DEAR REDIFF
THE STATES
YEH HAI INDIA!
ELECTIONS '98
ARCHIVES

Ayodhya demolition case moves at snail's pace

Sharat Pradhan in Lucknow

Even as the special designated court dealing with the Babri Masjid demolition case has fixed December 15 as the date for framing of charges against each of the 49 accused, there is little hope of the litigation coming to a close anywhere in the near future.

Babri Masjid Action Committee convener Zafaryab Jilani fears the slow pace at which the case was proceeding so far, it may drag into the 21st century. Multiplicity of issues, independent hearing by two separate courts, unending list of witnesses, combined with the not so regular availability of the special bench, were largely responsible for the continued delay.

Jilani said, "The special court of additional sessions judge (Central Bureau of Investigation) could not proceed with the case since four of the accused had move a writ petition before the Allahabad high court, challenging the validity of the special court's powers to summon them."

Meanwhile, delay also resulted from the Ayodhya case being dealt with by two separate courts -- the special criminal court dealing with the demolition and a civil suit pending before the high court, relating to the title of the disputed land on which the contentious shrine stood.

According to Jilani, "Both were likely to go on for a couple of years more." He pointed out, "Out of the 174 witnesses named by the Sunni Central Waqf Board, only 13 had testified so far; considering the current rate, it would not be possible to examine more than 20 to 25 witnesses per year, which means that this exercise alone would take at least six to eight years."

Significantly, apart from the delay caused on the part of the witnesses, time was being taken also because even the designated bench in the high court was not dedicated exclusively for the Ayodhya dispute. Members of the three-judge bench are required to attend to many other cases. In fact, one of the judges has to specially drive down to Lucknow whenever the case is to be taken up for hearing, which usually does not go beyond a week every month.

Another key factor responsible for repeated adjournments of the case was the multiplicity of parties engaged in the dispute. "Often delays have been caused on account of any of the 12 parties involved, seeking adjournment over one or the other ground," quips Jilani.

He has also joined issues with the state administration over the recent ban on burials in Ayodhya. Imposed from October 23 last, the ban was ordered in the wake of a similar restriction on cremation of dead bodies anywhere within the city limits of the ancient temple town.

However, following much opposition by local Muslim organisations, the Faizabad district authorities eventually allowed burial at two sites instead of the erstwhile dozen graveyards within Ayodhya city limits. However that has not yet pacified the Babri activist, who proposes to move the court on this issue.

Tell us what you think of this report