Organization: Penn State University
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1992 16:56:13 EDT
From: <DXA4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
Subject: Re: RJB-BS dispute (RE: RSS etc....)

In article <1992Aug31.091500@IASTATE.EDU>, jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed A Khan)
says:
>
>In article <92244.092606DXA4@psuvm.psu.edu>, <DXA4@psuvm.psu.edu> writes:
>> In article <1992Aug30.101801@IASTATE.EDU>, jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed A Khan)
>> says:
>> >As far as I know the BMAC has (at least publicly) always maintained that it
>> >will accept the decision of the court even if it goes against them.
>> >
>> >
>> >--Javed.
>>
>> It is also in  records that Imam Abdullha Bukhari had announced that any
>court
>> order in this dispute which goes against muslims, will not be acceptable to
>> us. Since according to him any court order in the Ramjanam Bhoomi-Babri
>mosque
>> dispute, which goes against the wishes of the muslims will be against the
>> Quran and hence against the Indian constitution, and has to be reversed,
>just
>> like it was done in Shah Bano case. Imam Bukhari's son heads the other
>splinter
>> group of the BMCC known as All India BM Action Committee.So it is doubtful
>that
>> what BMCC headed by Shahabuddin says, truly reflects the mind of muslim
>> leadership.
>>
>> Even,it was Mr. Shahbuddin who first refused to accept the court orders on
>this
>> issue when on Feb.1, 1986 a local court ordered to open the locks of the
>dispu-
>> ted shrine, and he went to form this BMCC which later on even made the
>treach-
>> rous nationawide call of boycotting the celebration of India's republic day.
>> And even now when courts are issuing the orders that the land on which the
>> Shilanyas was allowed is undisputed and also the acquirement of the 2.77
>acre
>> land around the disputed shrine is legal, Mr. Shahabuddin and Co. keep on
>> harping  that all the land is disputed,   owned by the Wakf Board, has an
>old
>> grave yard etc. Does not that go against court orders, are they honoring the
>> court orders? So what is the credibility of Mr. Shahabuddin and BMCC's
>assuran-
>> ce that they would accept the court orders? Most of the other Muslim leaders
>> have either kept mum on accepting court orders or refused to abide them if
>> they go against muslims.
>>
>> Dinesh Agrawal...
>
>
>
>First I want to make clear I'm no apologist for the likes of Shahabuddin,
>Bukhari,the BJP etc.
>
>But in response to the last part of your assertion I would like to point out
>that in any civil case or for that matter a criminal case, a citizen is free
>to appeal his or her case in a higher court if a lower court rules against his
>complaint or finds him guilty. Only the Supreme court has the final say in a
>civil case for which the litigant cannot appeal against.
>
>--Javed.
>

Here, I am referring to Supereme Court order only. Shah Bano's case was decided
in supereme court only after several years' litigation in the local court at
Bhopal. And this judgement was annuled by an enactment in the Parliament at
the pressure from Muslim fundamentalists led by Mr. Shahabudding on the plea
that the judgement was against the tenets of Quran. Also, Shahabuddin and Co.
did not appeal in Supreme Court against Faizabad court's arder to open the
locks of the disputed shrine, but they went ahead and formed the BMCC with the
primary aim of getting the court order reversed, not through the Supreme Court
but through political pressure as was successfully done in the Shah Bano case.
Bukhari et al. have also made the above announcement in reference to the
possible "Supreme Court's" judgement going against muslims in the RJB-BM
dispute.

Dinesh Agrawal...