THE TRIBUNE 10 CHANDIGARH | FRIDAY | 1 FEBRUARY 2019 The unfairAyodhya move THETRIBUNE Union Government is acting as a shadow benami party for Hindu owners established in 1881 saying this, the Union is challenging a judgment accepted since 1994. When the Nyas had filed a petition in the Supreme Court seeking direc- Chanda Kochhar indicted tions, the court had on July 21, 1997, praised the Central Government for Conviction must lead to withdrawal of national honour its correct stance in refusing the Nyas’ request. This position was RAJEEV DHAVAN HE Justice Srikrishna report is the final nail in Chanda reiterated by the court in 2002, 2003 Kochhar’s banking career. A commission of inquiry does not SENIOR ADVOCATE, SUPREME COURT and 2011. Today, the Centre has no Thave the rigour of a trial court, but the highly regarded judge objection, in principle, to restoring has irrevocably strengthened the public perception about a serious YODHYA’S Ram temple the land as a matter of duty to the conflict of interest between the role of the Padma Bhushan awardee was the mascot of the BJP’s Hindus after 25 years, even though as the custodian of public money and inappropriate lending predicat- electoral politics from the legal proceedings continue. The ed on a quid pro quo. Whether the CBI will go the whole hog in the time of the rath yatras of the Union thinks it is ‘in the larger case, given the split in the higher echelons of the government over a Aeighties. A White Paper on the wan- interest of justice’ because the Nyas wide-brush case against bankers, remains to be seen. ton Talibanesque destruction of the approached the Union Government, But the brazenness displayed by Kochhar and before that of the Babri Masjid (1992) was presented in which is obviously approaching the ICICI board comprising the stars of Indian private banking hints 1993. There has been a continuous SO FAR NOT GOOD: There are three winners and three losers, with no clear answers. court on the Nyas’ behalf. The that the breadth and seriousness of the crimes may be more than barrage of support for the temple at Union is not party to the case. Now, all costs. The party’s latest applica- it is a shadow benami party. that uncovered so far. The whistleblower’s revelations might as well tion in the Babri case to release the There is a solution: Give 0.333 acre to Muslims for a The land is needed because no one have died a natural death; after all the CBI’s preliminary probe had appurtenant land to the Hindu own- masjid. Take 67.703 acres, leaving a generous access liked the 2:1 Allahabad decision: hardly made glacial progress for two years and burst into life after ers is to appease the Sangha Parivar one-third each went to the Nirmohi a new officer was entrusted with the probe. While the investigation to encircle the disputed site. It is act- to the Muslims, and build the Ram temple. Akhara, the Deity and the Muslims will plod its course, there is a need for an examination of reform ing as the ‘benamidar’ of the Hindus — with the Muslim claim to be options to infuse greater accountability even among the monitors with malice aforethought. adjusted elsewhere, if necessary. for even the RBI in 2016 could not detect anything amiss in the In the 1994 Faruqui verdict, the rendered meaningless if the Muslims first appeal before the Supreme Where is this elsewhere? But the bank’s dealings and let the alleged misconduct go unpunished. Supreme Court gave an interpreta- are found entitled to the disputed Court, which is a continuation of the Hindu parties are fighting with each Moreover, the banks are now manufacturing myriad financial tion to the 1993 Ayodhya Act, convert- area’ and that the Manas Bhavan and High Court case whose decision was other. The Nirmohis say the Deity’s products and it is even more crucial to firmly tackle both personal as ing an acquisition statute into a Sita Ki Rasoi being ‘strategic in loca- too fractured to yield a satisfactory claim is corrupted, and want all of it. well as structural inadequacies that could lead to erosion of public standstill statute and making the tion’ were in a ‘unique class’ to justi- result. A first appeal is a rehearing The Deity wants all of it. The Sunni trust. Currently accounting for 30 per cent of business, private bank- Union Government a ‘statutory fy acquisition. It added that if this on all points raised. All the main Waqf Board wants all of it. But the ing has a huge growth potential. Chanda Kochhar’s alleged breach of receiver’, subject to a clear decision land was not needed, it could go back parties (Muslim and Hindu) are in appurtenant land was kept in status faith must not be allowed to taint the entire sector. In this respect, if on the title by the courts. By defini- to its Hindu owners. That moment, appeal. On May 9, 2011, the quo, so that access would be avail- tion, the Union was a neutral party too, has not yet come. Supreme Court, in the Mohd Siddiq able to the winners. But so far, there Chanda is convicted, it would be very necessary to take a second look with no ill will or favour towards any On March 17, 2002, in the Mohd case, again examined the issue and are three winners and three losers — at the national honour bestowed on her. In the past, former Haryana party, apart from its constitutional Aslam case, a three-judge Bench of ordered ‘status quo of the site and all need access to the site. The nation DGP RPS Rathore had the police medal withdrawn on conviction for obligation not to discriminate on the the Supreme Court ordered that adjacent land’. needs harmony. moral turpitude. There is no reason for an example to be made of a grounds of religion. The properties in this land would not be handed over To namdar and kamdar, we must The Union’s application is in the black sheep in the banking industry, if that is, indeed, the case. question under this statutory to the Hindus and remain neutral now add benamidar. In the present campaign mode, devoid of moral or receivership were the disputed site of without puja and shilanyas. Inter- application, the Union is actually legal justification. The Hindu sants 0.313 acre and 67.703 acres of appur- estingly in 2003, Attorney General siding with, and openly acting bena- now want to lay the foundation stone tenant land, which the Union in its Soli Sorabjee appeared for handing mi for the Hindu owners. When the on February 21. Where? On the site? application mischievously calls ‘sur- over this land to the Hindus, even Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas asked the This duplicity adds threat to outrage Jind jolt for INLD, Cong plus land’. According to the State- though he appeared for the Mus- Union for this land on June 6, 1996, and is contempt of court. ment of Objects and Reasons, the rea- lims in the Faruqui case — a com- the then government declined the There is still a solution: Give the BJP on top, fledgling JJP makes presence felt son for this extra acquisition was to plete flip-flop. On March 31, 2003, a request on August 14, 1996 — a view site (0.333 acre) to the Muslims to create ‘suitable adjacent land for set- five-judge Constitution Bench approved by the Supreme Court. rebuild their masjid. Take your N impressive victory in the Jind Assembly byelection has giv- ting up a complex land which could rejected the Union’s argument (this Today, in this application, the Union 67.703 acres, leaving a generous en the ruling BJP a strong head start in the run-up to the Lok be developed in a planned manner, time not led by Sorabjee) that the claims a ‘duty’ to restore the land. access to the Muslims, and build the ASabha and Haryana Vidhan Sabha elections. The verdict is wherein a Ram temple, a mosque, Faruqui judgment had overreached Actually, its duty is to remain neu- Ram temple. This intimidation also a triumph of sorts for young MP Dushyant Chautala, who had amenities to pilgrims, a library, muse- itself and ordered status quo till the tral. It goes further to say that which began in 1857. In July 1992, Muslims parted ways with the Indian National Lok Dal (INLD) amid a no- um and other facilities could be set Allahabad judgment, ‘not only to part should be released ‘in the destroyed a Ramjanmasthan temple, holds-barred family feud and founded the Jannayak Janata Party up’. That moment has still not come. maintain communal harmony, but domain of policy’ beyond ‘judicial 45 metres north of the masjid. States- (JJP) late last year. On its electoral debut, the AAP-backed JJP put up The Faruqui judgment thought that also fulfil the objectives of the Act’. scrutiny’ and beyond the Act of manship, not intimidation, is the a good fight to finish second. the appurtenant land would ‘not be The 2010 Allahabad judgment is in 1993. Hence, judicial hands off. By answer. There is a solution. The big losers are the INLD and the Congress, the main opposition parties in the state. The former finished a lowly fifth, even below the Loktantra Suraksha Party formed by BJP’s rebel MP Raj Kumar Saini. The INLD lost face as well as the seat it had won in 2009 and 2014 thanks to Hari Chand Middha, whose death necessitated the bypoll.