• Monday, 18 November, 2019 10:49:AM

     The court verdict is having two important points to be appreciated otherwise it would not have been possible to have such a verdict. Sources say the one is Nirmohi Akhara, who claimed that they are performing puja for years together on the attached Chabutara and second who has given an idea to make Ramlala as one party in the case. Sources say strangely it is not Akhara, VHP or any other person or party but the then Home Minister Buta Singh. It's on record that in the year 1951 Gopal Singh Visharad asked for permission to worship and in 1959 Nirmohi Akhara asked for permission to manage temple and in 1961 Sunni Waqf Board requested for ownership of the land of Masjid.In the year 1989-89 when the agitation was on top, Buta Singh advised leaders of VHP that with the agitation not possible to have temple unless the court gives verdict or parliament passes such order, which is not possible because the strength is very less. Further, sources say, he advised that when you do not have ownership of land, how can build the temple, and said he directed the leaders to meet Lala Narayan Sinha a prominent civil lawyer at Patna. Later Justice Devki Nandan with one of his lawyer visited Sinha at Patna. Sources say this was the idea of Sinha to make Ram Lala a party in the court and accordingly Devki Lal filed a case saying that being a friend of Ramlala wants to have ownership of land. This has made the case strong in favour and the later court allowed ownership.


Copyright© 2015 - 2020 www.witnessinthecorridors.com
All Rights Reserved