Hem Raj Jain writes An Complaint / Petition to 'National Commission for Minorities'

Image

To,

National Commission for Minorities (NCM)

3rd Floor, Block-3, CGO Complex,

New Delhi 110 003

Subject: - Complaint about destruction of rule-of-law adversely and dangerously affecting minority (specially Muslims) hence also petition for intervening in SCI proceedings about Ayodhya dispute in the interest of avoiding another (highly likely) mass scale killing of innocent Muslims in near future.

Hon’ble Commission

The complainant / Petitioner humbly submits as follows: -

[1]- That the cause of action for this complaint / petition is the letter dated May 31, 2019 of BJP Member of Parliament Subramaniyan Swamy to PM Narendra Modi and recent statements (during 2019 Loksabha election campaign too) in media of other Member of Parliament and office bearers from ruling Party BJP (including MP Sadhvi Pragya Thakur) which is due to emboldening of communal element of Hindutva forces (including BJP responsible for demolition on December 6, 1992 of Babri Masjid situated at Ayodhya in Uttar Pradesh) which is the result of the destruction of rule-of-law (due to non-restoration of status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid). Hence I am deeply concerned as an Indian citizen about fall-out of said destruction of rule-of-law coupled with high handed attitude of Hindutva forces (which is doggedly taking India from secular State to theocratic State) and which has highly likelihood of not only another mass scale killing (as happened post Babri masjid demolition all across India including in 2002 in Gujarat) of innocent Muslims in future but also will have adverse and dangerous effect on other minorities, who believe in modern and progressive secularism.

[2]- That the complainant / Petitioner knows that Hindutva forces have every constitutional right to convert Indian secular State into theocratic State (the ‘Hindu Rashtra’) by amending the Constitution with 2/3 rd majority in the Parliament but Indian State should not help Hindutva forces in gaining this 23 majority in Parliament and in getting political power at Centre and in States by destroying the rule-of-law (by not restoring the legally expected status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid).

[3]- That MP Swamy  in his said letter to PM Narendra Modi (reported extensively by national media for the purpose of arousing communal sentiments amongst majority community Hindus across the country available also athttps://www.republicworld.com/india-news/politics/declare-ram-setu-as-a-national-monument-and-commence-building-ram-temple-writes-dr-subramanian-swamy-in-a-letter-to-pmo-read-it-here) in essence says that –“[There is no bar in the law which stands in the way of Government of India allocating this 67.72 acres of land in Ayodhya to anybody which has a ‘public character for building of the Ram Temple’. Hence without any lapse of time the Government in exercise of its power allocate the land, both disputed and undisputed, for the Ram Lala temple which was there before the demolition by the builders of Babri Masjid. Furthermore, the Government can inform the Supreme Court that the compensation as decided by the Hon’ble Court will be given to winning appellate]”

[4]- That the Hindutva forces (including MP Swamy) do not understand that many temples of Hindus, Jains etc were destroyed by Muslim invaders and rulers during about 1,000 years from 8th to 18th century. Hence merely destruction of a temple in Ayodhya and building a mosque at its place is not a big deal. What is highlighted by Hindutva forces is that Lord Rama was born at the disputed site of Masjid. But Muslims have adduced a very powerful & effective argument before the Court that ‘Ram Charit Manas’ (through which majority of Hindus know about the life of Lord Rama) written by Goswami Tulsidas after construction of Babri-Masjid in 16th century, has mention of Ayodhya as Lord Rama’s city of birth but does not have any mention of Lord Rama’s birth place at disputed site. Therefore, contrary to what MP Swamy says there is no “public character for building of the Ram Temple”. That is the reason MP Swamy also knows that Hindus have no chance of winning in title suit in a way they want where Muslims will get nothing from title suit.

[5]- That MP Swamy (an advocate of repute hence commands prestige and credibility among Indians and even with SCI which allowed him to appear in Ayodhya dispute) has deliberately mis-interpreted the judgment of SCI which adjudicated on the validity of the Ayodhya Act, 1993 related to the acquisition of this 67.72 acres of land. The SCI in this judgment (available athttps://indiankanoon.org/doc/37494799/) said clearly, the relevant part as given below: -

“{{CONCLUSIONS 98. As a result of the above discussion, our conclusions, to be read with the discussion, are as follows: -

(1) (a) Sub-section (3) of section 4 of the. Act abates all pending suits and legal proceedings without providing for an alternative dispute resolution mechanism for resolution of the dispute between the parties thereto. This is an extinction of the judicial remedy for resolution of the dispute amounting to negation of rule of law. Sub-section (3) of section 4 of the Act is, therefore, unconstitutional and invalid.

(1) (b) The remaining provisions of the Act do not suffer from any invalidity on the construction made thereof by us. Sub-section (3) of section 4 of the Act is severable from the remaining Act. Accordingly, the challenge to the constitutional validity of the remaining Act, except for Sub-section (3) of section 4, is rejected.

(4) The vesting of the said disputed area in the Central Government by virtue of section 3 of the Act is limited, as a statutory receiver, with the duty for it management and administration according to section 7 requiring maintenance of status quo therein under Sub-section (2) of section 7 of the Act. The duty of the Central Government as the statutory receiver is to hand over the disputed area in accordance with section 6 of the Act, in terms of the adjudication made in the suits for implementation of the final decision therein. This is the purpose for: which the disputed area has been so acquired.

(6) The vesting of the adjacent area, other than the disputed area, acquired by the Act in the Central Government by virtue of section 3 of the Act is absolute with the power of management and administration thereof in accordance with Sub-section (1) of section 7 of the Act, till its further vesting in any authority or other body or trustees of any trust in accordance with section 6 of the Act. The further vesting of the adjacent area, other than the disputed area, in accordance with section 6 of the Act has to be made at the time and in the manner indicated, in view of the purpose of its acquisition.

99. These matters are disposed of, accordingly, in the manner stated above}}”.

[6]- That in a nutshell [except where undisputed area is to be dealt in above mentioned manner explained at 98 (6)] the GOI is merely a care taker (statutory receiver) of disputed and undisputed area and is supposed to hand-over the disputed area to the litigant which ever wins in title suit pending with SCI. Therefore a senior advocate MP Swamy must be knowing when he says that “[ Hence without any lapse of time the Government in exercise of its power allocate the land, both disputed and undisputed, for the Ram Lala temple]” is legally neither here nor there and legally untenable. But MP Swamy still said so precisely for the purpose of arousing communal sentiments amongst majority community Hindus across the country which is evident from the fact that as per media the said letter of MP Swamy was extensively quoted in the meeting of over hundred Hindu Saints at Ayodhya on June 3, 2019 for demanding immediate construction of Ram Temple at disputed site notwithstanding title suit about Babri Masjid pending in SCI.

[7]- Here it is pertinent to add that Hon’ble Supreme Court did not repeal the ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993’ because Babri Masjid was not constructed by Government of India which changed the entire context of the case as mentioned in the above quoted judgment at – “{{58. Reference may be made to the statements of the Central Government soon after the demolition on 7th December, 1992 and 27th December, 1992 wherein it was said that the mosque would be rebuilt. It was urged that the action taken on 7th January, 1993 to issue an Ordinance, later replaced by the Act, and simultaneously to make the Reference to this Court under Article 143 (1) of the Constitution amounts to resiling from the earlier statements for the benefit of the Hindu community. It is sufficient to say that the earlier statements so made cannot limit the power of the Parliament and are not material for adjudging the constitutional validity of the enactment. The validity of the statute has to be determined on the touchstone of the Constitution and not any statements made prior to it. We have therefore no doubt that section 7 does not suffer from the infirmity of being anti-secular or discriminatory to render it unconstitutional}}”. Now when NCM will be praying SCI to restore status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid it will change the entire context of the matter hence NCM is legally expected to pray before SCI to also repeal ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993’ (because this Act is the source of all the mischiefs in this matter) and dispose / release as per law the acquired both disputed and undisputed land under this Act.

[8]-  That precisely from the highly likelihood of Muslims not losing completely the title suit about Babri Masjid in SCI, the problem starts for Hindutva forces / BJP , who have come in power at Center and in many States (assisted by Indian State by destroying rule-of-law by not restoring status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid) by boldly (in a legally objectionable manner) telling the people (especially to Hindu religious leaders / VHP etc) that Muslims will be removed from disputed site and Ram Mandir will be built without any Masjid at disputed site. Though this letter of MP Swamy to PM Narendra Modi will not bring any such relief to Hindutva forces but they will not take it easy and will not remain in peace and in order to retain their threatened political power at Centre and in States rather will try to make Ram Mandir at disputed site through legislation by making India a theocratic State, the Hindu Rashtra and which has all the danger of throwing India into huge bloodshed (mainly of related minority, the Muslims).

[9]- That there is only one legal way-out from this impending crisis that is (before any judgment in Ayodhya dispute), the NCM (independently or along with NHRC) should intervene in the proceedings of Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid title suit pending in SCI  by filing writ petition in SCI with the approval of SCI (otherwise it will be lowering the authority of court which is criminal contempt even on the part of SCI under sections 2 ( C)  (i), 16 of Contempt of Court Act) for legally expected restoration of Status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid which was demolished in 1992 in the presence of Observer of SCI and also for getting repealed the ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993’. Also with a prayer in this writ petition that SCI should direct Government of India (GOI) to be ready to requisition UNPKF in case communal Hindutva forces create law & order problem all across the country during restoration of Masjid (if security forces of India can go in other countries for maintaining peace though UNPKF then security forces of other countries can also come in India for maintaining peace through UNPKF).

[10]- That here it is legally pertinent to add that the criminal audacity and high handedness of Hindutva forces (facilitated by non-restoration of Babri Masjid by Indian State) needs to be first brought under control. In case of restoration of status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid (in addition to strengthening rule-of-law) Hindutva forces will not be able to arouse strong emotions among majority community Hindus because it will be for upholding authority of Supreme Court. Whereas in case of reconstructing Masjid due to title suit in favor of Muslims (not in favor of Hindus in a way they want) the Hindutva forces will be able to arouse strong emotion in Hindu majority India because it will be projected as “Hindus not getting away with destruction of one Masjid (that too at site where as per them Lord Rama was born) whereas Muslims got away with destruction of any number of Temples during ~ 1,000 years of their invasion and rule”.

[11] That the complainant / Petitioner has talked to many Muslims and their organizations for filing this petition in SCI for the restoration of status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid and related matters but they say that Muslims are afraid to do it out of the fear from Hindutva forces who has become emboldened on account of illegally handled Ayodhya dispute by Indian State. Therefor it is legally imperative that NCM files this writ petition in SCI for the restoration of status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid and for getting repealed the ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993’

[12]- That the relevant laws for filing said writ petition and making detailed inquiry and investigation before filing this writ petition in SCI for restoration of status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid and for getting repealed the ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993’

are sections 9 (1) (d) (4) of ‘The National Commission for Minorities Act 1992’ and sections 2 (f), (h), 3 (3), 12 (b) of ‘The Protection of Human Rights Act 1993’. 

In view of above mentioned the Hon’ble Commission is requested to kindly file (before decision in title suit) the petition in Supreme Court for the restoration of status-quo-ante of Babri Masjid and for getting repealed the ‘Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993’ after proper inquiry and investigation in this matter and any other relief and remedy in the facts and circumstances of this matter is also requested.

Yours truly

Hem Raj Jain

Bengaluru - 560078, Karnataka, India

Date: June 6, 2019

CC to:- 1- H.E President of India, New Delhi 2- Hon Prime Minister of India, New Delhi 3- Hon.Supreme Court of India, New Delhi 4- Hon. Chairman NHRC, New Delhi 5- H.E. Governor of U.P., Lucknow 6- Hon. Minister for Minority Affairs, New Delhi 7- Hon. Chief Minister U.P. Lucknow 8- Hon. Minister of State for Minority Affairs, New Delhi

You May Also Like

Image

HRFP urged to recover the abducted minority girls including the recent Christian girl Fiza:

Toba Tek Singh: Human Rights Focus Pakistan (HRFP) urged to recover the abducted minority girls including the recent juvenile Christian girl Fiza A

Image

UK Government conference on religious freedom triggers concern about apostasy hatred in UK

London: (By Hannah Chowdhry)  The UK government hosted a human rights conference to urge increased global action on Freedom of Religion o

Image

Christian with mental condition survives brutal mob beating but is now fighting blasphemy allegations

London: (By Hannah Chowdhry) A mentally disabled man has been charged with blasphemy following a complaint by two Muslim men.



Stephen Mas



"Trial of Pakistani Christian Nation" By Nazir S Bhatti

On demand of our readers, I have decided to release E-Book version of "Trial of Pakistani Christian Nation" on website of PCP which can also be viewed on website of Pakistan Christian Congress www.pakistanchristiancongress.org . You can read chapter wise by clicking tab on left handside of PDF format of E-Book.

nazirbhattipcc@aol.com , pakistanchristianpost@yahoo.com