As someone physically present in Court Room 1 for all those days, I attentively heard the Hindu parties’ submissions as they clamoured on the idea of an invader and his attack on their faith. As an insignificant junior, who spent her lunch breaks guarding books and papers in the Courtroom, I sat through sudden shouts of Jai Shri Ram when Dr. Dhavan walked by. And, finally, as a lawyer who wore black robes and believed in the law of the land, I lived through the moments when Dr. Dhavan argued law, history, divinity and philosophy with equal prowess, mesmerizing every thinking soul of Courtroom 1.
State-sponsored pogroms often create three categories of people. The victors, the defeated and the ones who fought for the now-defeated. It is often the last category of people who pay dearly for choosing morals over labels. Come the 10th of November 2019, Senior Advocate, Dr. Rajeev Dhavan is going to be counted as one of them: a fallen Hindu, perhaps, whose soul is destined to suffer eternal damnation.
A few days have passed since the Supreme Court announced its unanimous verdict in the Babri Masjid dispute. The news media is busy with flashy headlines and headshots of the “diabolical” convenor of the Babri Action Committee, Senior Advocate Zafaryab Jilani. The gentleman has been rewarded well for years of his devotional service to this dispute.
Twitter and Instagram are flooded with memes made of divine images of the lord who just became the unchallenged owner of the 2.5 acres of Waqf Land (considered legally inalienable otherwise) that was given to the people Ayodhya by emperor Babur in 1528 (presumably).
People are talking about unity and brotherhood. The legal minds are praising the “well-reasoned” judgment. Veteran politicians are reminiscing about the glorious 6th of December and how validated they feel today. The Chairman of the minority commission has claimed that Muslims too are happy with the judgment. One wonders, is it fear? Is it majority appeasement? Or is it the primal instinct of ratting out your kin so that you are spared the gallows. In many a holocaust tale, these characters recur. That obnoxious Jew who gave away his friends, neighbours and family members to the steel-faced SS personnel. They were rewarded at first, promoted thereafter, only to disappear into nameless pits.
To most people following the proceedings, the judgment unfurled as follows:
1) Emperor Babur built the mosque.
2) The premises housed the birthplace of Lord Ram. Such was a matter of faith, which remained undisputed.
3) There is no evidence to show that a temple was demolished to make way for the mosque.
3) The structure beneath the mosque was a non-Islamic structure.
4) The idols were surreptitiously placed in the masjid premises only in 1949.
5) The act of demolition in 1992 was against the rule of law
Justice had to be done. It would be done by this Constitution Bench of new India.
The entire premises was to be offered to the divine deity represented by members of a newly formed trust. This “well-reasoned” judgment is eloquent, well structured and addresses every aspect of the dispute that was put forward. The only things that conspicuously remains absent are a reason and a sense of equity. Perhaps the legal minds of India mistake reason for structure. Or they simply choose to see what they wish to. Irrespective, the massive 1000+ pages of law and facts have today given nothing but priority to faith over legal rights.
The Sunnis lost, The Shias lost, and the oldest contender herein, the Nirmohi Akhara too, lost. India now rejoices in the euphoria of holy victory. In all their anti-Muslim tirade, they never noticed, that one of the first claimants of the dispute, the Hindu Nirmohi Akhara, no longer remained in the picture. The future of Ram Janmabhoomi would now be in the hands of a trust created by the Victors and their trusted allies. Divine history was not being validated. A new political history was being created instead. As for the defeated army of Muslims, the Indian State had long denounced paternity of this illegitimate child. The farce of rule of law that had remained had now faded away.
As someone physically present in Court Room 1 for all those days, I attentively heard the Hindu parties’ submissions as they clamoured on the idea of an invader and his attack on their faith. As an insignificant junior, who spent her lunch breaks guarding books and papers in the courtroom, I sat through sudden shouts of Jai Shri Ram when Dr. Dhavan walked by. And, finally, as a lawyer who wore black robes and believed in the law of the land, I lived through the moments when Dr. Dhavan argued law, history, divinity and philosophy with equal prowess. The Constitution Bench sat spellbound as he explained the concept of juristic personality and sashayed across cases in Australia, South Africa and British India to explain his concepts. His health sometimes gave upon him, as he stopped to cough. When offered water, he would still joke to say, the only time he would stop to drink mid-submission would be if there was whisky instead of water on the offer!
This day witnessed the loss of not just the most persecuted minority of India. But, of the law, of the meticulous indexing of notes and submissions, of a pan disciplinary approach to the law, of wit and candour and finally, of hope. To the Muslims, they said, peace was a priority. That smile was a must. Accept this in the name of unity and for the mystic yet undefined element called peace, the preservation and upkeep of which was always an onus on the weaker side.
In India 2.0, Unity stands for uniformity. If eight of the ten fruits in a basket are red apples, you are not allowed to be a repulsive yellow lemon. You either leave the basket. Or you paint yourself red. As seniors at the bar say, “It’s all about the optics”.
I do not know if a review petition is going to be filed, the results of which we already know. I do not know if tomorrow a hundred more mosques will be broken because there lies structures left by evolution under them What I do know is that, India 2.0 is an exclusive club. It chooses its citizens seriously and its non-citizens with even more caution.
There will always be people who will rejoice as the weak tremble and fall. There will always be grand old political parties who will whimper in cowardice and there will probably be people like Dr. Rajeev Dhavan who will continue to stand up for what they believe is right, amidst jeers, threats and humiliation. The man always knew what the outcome would be. Yet he tirelessly read, wrote and argued. He saved his notes and often said that he would write about it someday. Some day, when people looked beyond hatred and into their conscience.
As I look around at the celebratory crowds, I can only hope that in the upcoming golden years of this Rashtra, there will remain some who will read and seek knowledge, question power and narrate facts as the business would continue in the largest democracy of the world.
*The author wishes to remain anonymous due to personal reasons.*