Positives and Negatives of Ayodhya Verdict

POSITIVES

NEGATIVES

1.      This Judgment is Unique that it could satisfy many sections of the society

2.      Panic created on the minds of everycitizen by the State was put to cold storage.

3.      It prevailed the Rule of  Law giving adequate scope for appeal to the dissatisfied.

4.       Despite the issue being very sensitive it drew support from all political parties.

5.      Throughout the process of litigation it helped to identify secular and non-secular forces in the country

6.      It made a strong statement to all political parties who play with religious sentiments to win votes. No party would play this card any more in the future while contesting any elections.

7.      It drew a rare unity amongst political parties to make the communities feel that they are neither winners nor loosers.

8.      Enhanced the global image of the country by establishing Secularism in the true letter and spirit.

9.      Judicially initiated Reconciliation efforts by the parties to go ahead for amicable settlement.

10.  Above all, it showed to the world that India is the only country where Temples and Mosques could exist together side by side.

1. Judgment is arrived purely on the basis of evidences supplied by Archaeological Survey of India which is not an independent autonomous body like CAG or Election Commission. Aggrieved parties can legally disprove such material or historical evidences.
2. Mythological factors and religious belief were given much weightage to  draw conclusion.
3. Exceeded its Judiciary purview to substantiate the birth of God or existence of Rama.
4. It says that Masjid was not constructed after demolition of temple and only ruins were there over which Babar made the mosque. How it failed to understand the fact such Ruins never fell from heaven?
5. Sets unwarranted precedent as to draw conclusion and award share in such a proportion without any claim from the litigants.
6. When it could dismiss the Waqf Board title suit on the grounds of limitation how can it allocate 1/3^rd share to Muslims setting filthy precedents.
7. Normally unanimity is expected from the Bench containing three judges but Judgment was a three-way traffic again setting a bad precedent.
8. In the name of respecting religious sentiments of either communities it gave too much importance for unscientific principles.
9. It was silent on the criminal acts committed by the Kar Sevaks and political parties responsible  on 06.12.1992 for demolishing the Babri Masjid.
10. Above all, it was performing the role of Kangroo Court in drawing conclusions on the basis of Religious Faith and belief .

Layman’s Original News VERSUS Lawman’s  Personal Views