Court role
It is a matter of fact that BJP/RSS/VHP was not a party in the case.
Sri Ram Lala Virajman, Hindu Mahasabha, RJB Punaruddhar Samiti (of Shankaracharya), Nirmohi Akhara, and two Mahants of Ayodhya Suresh Das and Dharam Das - these were the Hindu parties that argued in Allahabad HC.
In this thread I had documented the full list of lawyers and Hindu parties they represented - who had actually argued the case for the temple. (Source: TW) The list is in order of the coverage sequence, as acknowledged by the Court itself.
Here is the full list of lawyers who argued for the temple in All’d HC.
- Adv. PN Mishra, representing Ram Janmabhumi Punaruddhar Samiti.
- Main lawyer.
- (PN Mishra was engaged by RJB Punaruddhar Samiti in Sep 2009. Till then its lawyer was someone else.).
- Adv Ranjana Agnihotri, also representing the RamJanmabhumi Punaruddhar Samiti, and assisting Adv PN Mishra
- Adv R L Verma and
- Adv Tarunjeet Verma Both representing Nirmohi Akhara
- Advocate Ravi Shankar Prasad Representing Mahant Suresh Das
- Advocate M M Pandey, also representing Mahant Suresh Das and assisting Adv Ravi Shankar Prasad
- Senior Advocate P R Ganapathi Iyer, representing Mahant Dharam Das
- Advocate Rakesh Pandey, also representing Mahant Dharam Das, and assisting Sr. Adv. PR Ganapathi Iyer.
- Advocate Harishankar Jain, representing Hindu Mahasabha
- Senior Advocate K N Bhat, representing Bhagawan Shri Ram Lala Virajman
- Advocate A K Pandey, also representing Bhagawan Shri Ram Lala Virajman, and assisting Sr. Adv. K N Bhat
- Adv JS Jain, also representing Hindu Mahasabha, and assisting Adv Harishankar Jain
These are the lawyers who argued for temple in front of the 3-judge bench of Allahabad High Court between January and July of 2010, for more than 90 days of actual hearing.
As Svami Abimukteshvarananda ji says, Advocates PN Mishra and Ranjana Agnihotri, representing Ramajanmabhumi Punaruddhara Samiti (founded by Shankaracharya) - were listened to by the judges the most. Just read the case file. What Svami Ji however doesn’t mention here is that the Judges in their order have called him out by name to thank him for the evidences presented as an Expert Witness.
INC role
1984 - the Dharma Sansad organized by VHP had INC support. Took place in a govt premise and a career Congressman Karan Singh attended. He announced: “We cannot even light a lamp at RJB! How shameful for 80% of this country’s residents who call themselves Hindus!”
Next year, in 1985, Rajiv Gandhi’s Info Broadcasting ministry approached Ramanand Sagar to produce a mega TV serial on Ramayana.
1986 - Rajiv ordered opening of the taala at Ayodhya to allow pooja of the murtis. Suddenly Babri Masjid and Ayodhya came on the front pages of the newspaper. Rajiv doubled down and even went to do the ground breaking for the Ram Mandir which was telecasted live on Doordarshan.
Starting Jan 1987, it was during INC rule that it started airing primetime on Doordarshan, which used to be taunted as Rajiv Darshan by ABV.
narasiMha-rAv
Sources: AryAMsha, sarvesh, Elst
Pro-demolition view
He also privately said “I let it happen” to a contact. YT
Is the claim true that Narsimharao and later Bajpai wanted to build Babri and Ram temple side by side?
It is correct. Towards it, PVNR took initiative of creating a body that included 5 Shankaracharyas & Acharyas of Pejavar, Jiyar, Vallabha, Ramananda, SV, Gaudiyas. He sent his minister from Orissa KC Lenka to recruit Puri Acharya for it. The latter punctured the plan.
… That is why, after CM Kalyan Singh, even PM Narasimha Rao allowed the Demolition. He calculated as a Congress leader that this would throw the BJP on the defensive; & as a pro-temple Hindu, that this would lift the biggest hurdle to the temple-building.
Anti-demolition view
Being a conservative and religious traditional Hindu is never enough, being a political Hindu matters a lot more. Narasimhan Rao used to think being a South Indian Brahmin who could quote scripture and Sanskrit meant he would have enough sway with BJP, RSS, VHP leaders that Babri would never fall. He was wrong.
Rao personally met Advani in a safe house in the last week of December where he was given assurance Babri wouldn’t fall. Kalyan Singh had also given his word, so had Bhairon Singh Shekhawat. Rao had decided not to dismiss the Kalyan Singh government on the basis of all these assurances.
2 lakh Kar Sevaks had gathered around Ayodhya. 12 pm, December 6, 1992 the destruction of Babri would begin like a long line of dominoes falling one after the other.
When Rao was informed the first dome had fallen he couldn’t talk for some minutes. He felt betrayed by all the Hindu leaders that had assured him Babri would stand. Kalyan Singh and the BJP Government swung into action to make sure the mosque fell without any CRPF intervention.
Court role
Source: KE
Well, no. In 1019 the Supreme Court, judging autonomously regardless of the Modi Gvt., only confirmed the UP High Court verdict allotting the site to the Hindus. This was in 2010, w/ the BJP out of power in UP & at the Centre. The decisive factor was the scholarly evidence.
But the ones who, next to the scholars, vitally contributed to the temple, are the Kar Sevaks. After the Eminent Fatwa of 1989, the crucial mosque demolition had become unfeasible but for them.
BJP
It is excellent that the 2024 temple reinaguration is a political event with patronage of the nation’s current leader NaMo.
However, the BJP has to thank Śrī Rāma, it owes its 1989 & 1991 electoral breakthrough to him. It is also true that congressis like R Ga senior and PVN wanted the temple as well (and credited to them). So, overall, BJP does not deserve credit.
Within BJP, it is true that kalyAN singh types loved the demolition while vAjapeyee types were distraught. Also just contrast the popular “No regrets, no repentance, no sorrow, no grief.” video of none other than kalyAN singh with ones by vAjapeyin , advAni etc..
Sections of https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pLl7vriDTDY , which I listened to yesterday are relevant.
RSS role
RSS didn’t demolish the structure. It was protecting it. Evidence points towards its demolition despite the contrary wishes of RSS leadership. It just fits their samanvaya & “muslim is hindu” ideology. Been there since at least the time of Sitaram Goel and Ram Swarup criticisms.