Justice eludes when the court aligns with majority of Hindus: Muslim leaders

Establishing that the fate of the Babri Masjid would be the case of other mosques across the country, as asserted by the right-wing group, was the Varanasi court ruling allowing Hindus to conduct Puja in the cellar inside the Gyanvapi mosque.

The Muslim leaders in the country expressed deep dismay, anguish, and scepticism regarding the delivery of justice from a court that should have upheld the law, but instead, paid the least consideration to the existing Places of Worship Act, ruling in favour of the majority community. The decision has ignited a fiery debate surrounding principles of justice, secularism, and constitutional values.

Scepticism has been growing among the minority Muslim community in India ever since the right-wing political party led by Narendra Modi ascended to power with their declared goal of pushing the Muslim community as second-class citizens. This scepticism, now being further deepened by the Varanasi court ruling, unveils the concerns harboured by the community.

Expressing deep dismay, Maulana Khalid Saifullah Rahmani, president of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board, characterized the court's ruling as not only dismissive of the Muslim community's plea but also neglectful of the sentiments of millions of Hindus, Sikhs, and Christians who view India as a diverse tapestry of faiths, as quoted by The Wire.

Rahmani criticized the judgment as hasty, alleging a disregard for crucial evidence and the Places of Worship Act of 1991, which bars the conversion of religious sites.

"This verdict sets a dangerous precedent," Rahmani cautioned, warning of potential communal conflicts if the Places of Worship Act is not upheld by the judiciary.

Syed Arshad Madani, President of Jamiat-Ulama-i-Hind, lamented the escalating challenges faced by Indian Muslims, citing a perceived alignment of the judiciary with the government's majoritarian agenda. Madani drew parallels to the contentious Babri Masjid dispute, asserting that the Supreme Court's decision in favour of the Hindu side had emboldened Hindutva forces to stake claims on Muslim places of worship nationwide.

"Such erosion of trust in the judiciary and administration is deeply troubling," remarked Malik Mohtasim Khan of Jamaat-e-Islami, highlighting the swift implementation of the court's order by authorities despite the seven-day window granted. Khan's remarks underscored a growing sense of disenchantment within the Muslim community regarding access to justice, according to The Wire report.

N.A. Farooqui of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board criticized the higher courts' reluctance to intervene, implying a perceived bias favouring those wielding power. The leaders collectively condemned what they perceived as a trend towards a "majoritarian judiciary," urging constitutional officials to uphold the judicial system's impartiality.

The leaders' impassioned plea for justice comes in stark contrast to their earlier acceptance of the 2019 Supreme Court ruling on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid case, signalling a shift in their stance amidst mounting challenges to religious pluralism.

Critics of the Varanasi court's decision have echoed the sentiments of the Muslim leaders, denouncing what they view as an infringement on the rights of minority communities. Concerns have been raised regarding the unilateral disclosure of archaeological findings by the Hindu side, exacerbating societal tensions and undermining the mosque's legal recourse.

The controversy surrounding the Gyanvapi mosque highlights broader concerns regarding the integrity of India's judicial system and its role in safeguarding minority rights. As the nation grapples with deepening religious divisions, the appeal for impartiality and adherence to constitutional values resonates as a call for fundamental justice.

In response to mounting pressure, the Muslim leaders have sought an audience with President of India Droupadi Murmu and Chief Justice of India D Y Chandrachud to convey their concerns, underscoring the urgency of addressing the perceived erosion of minority rights within the judicial framework.