Ever since the Allahabad high court gave its verdict on the Ayodhya title suits, much has been written and debated about the deity, “Shri Ram Chandra Virajman”, being a party to the case and the court recognising “Him” as a legal entity and allowing his petition for handing over one-third of the disputed 2.77 acres of land to him.
It has also been widely debated that the verdict on the title suits could not “wash away the illegal act” of December 6, 1992, that of demolishing the disputed structure. In fact, Justice D.V. Sharma, who gave the dissenting judgment, generally “ignored” by critics and analysts, has dealt with these aspects.
Justice Sharma is the only one among the three judges who has strongly disapproved the demolition of the disputed structure when the matter was subjudice.
Summing up the December 6, 1992 events, he said the assembled gathering had even demolished several other small temples in which the Hindus were regularly worshipping. “On 6th December, 1992, the main temple of ‘Nirmohi Akhara’ was also demolished by some miscreants who had no religion caste or creed,” Justice Sharma has observed.
What actually constitutes “Shri Ram Chandra Virajman (Lord Ram residing himself)”, Justice Sharma recorded a long list of deities, who, according to Hindu belief, had been “residing” there for centuries.
The deities cited include “Bhagwan Ram Chandra Ji, Laxman Ji, Hanuman Ji, Sita Ji, Saliqram Ji, Charan Paduka (wooden sandals) of Shri Ram Chandra Ji (which he gave to his younger brother Bharat when he went to call him back from vanvas), a small pair of silver Charan Paduka (believed to have been used by Lord Ram as a small child)”.
“They (Charan Paduka) are not fixed to any stone, structure or floor but are placed loose near the idol. The idol of Bhagwan Ram Chandra Ji at the place in suit is an Achal (immovable} idol,” Justice Sharma said.
Justice Sharma has also dealt in length what “Nirmohi Akhara”, which was given one-third share in the disputed land by the majority judges, actually is.
“Nirmohi Akhara is the Panchayati Math of Ram Nandi sect of Vairagies and as such is a religious denomination following its own religious faith and pursuit according to its own custom prevalent in Vairagies sect of Sadhus,” he said.
“Nirmohi Akhara owns several temples in it (around the disputed structure) and all of such temples through panches and mahants of the Akhara. The whole temples and properties vest in the Akhara. Being a Panchayati Math, it acts on a democratic pattern. The management and right to manage all temples of Akhara vest absolutely with panches of Akhara and a mahant being the formal head of the institution, is to act on majority opinion of panches,” Justice Sharma recorded.
He accounted how the British rulers had visualised Ayodhya as a “potential” trouble spot and had in 1857 ordered the division of the sthan (place) between Hindus and Muslims by creating an inner enclosure and describing the boundary within the inner enclosure as a mosque.
“But no Muslim, who was a true Muslim, could appear to have frequented it for offering his prayer as the same is prohibited by the Sharia. Even Alamgir (Emperor Aurangzeb) issued a mandate, known as ‘Fatwa-e-Alamgiri’, which clearly prohibits the offering of prayer by Muslim at such place, which has ‘Kasauti’ pillars with carvings of gods and goddesses thereon will clearly show that this place could not be used by a true Muslim for offering prayers,” Justice Sharma said.