Two residents of Ayodhya have filed a revision appeal against the CBI court’s shocking verdict acquitting all the accused in the Babri Masjid demolition case. The entire nation had witnessed the demolition of a mosque on their television screens in December 1992, and had suffered through the communal riots in its aftermath.
The appeal has been filed against the September 30, 2020 judgment passed by Special CBI court, Lucknow. The applicants are victims as well as witnesses of the crime in question and they had suffered loss of the historical place of worship known as Babri Masjid as well as financial loss on account of destruction of their houses due to arson and loot.
The application states that they are filing this revision so that culprits may not go unpunished for the heinous crime committed by them and because they fear that CBI may not file the appeal against acquittal under the pressure of the BJP government. Moreover, the CBI has not responded to public appeals made by several Muslim organisations including All India Muslim Personal Law Board and Babri Masjid Action Committee etc to challenge the acquittals.
The application calls out the special court for having acted illegally and with material irregularity in holding that the accused persons were not involved in the crime. The application further speaks about common intention of the accused to demolish Babri Masjid and states that “the essence of liability to be found in the existence of common intention is that the criminal act complained against was done by one of the accused persons in furtherance of common intention of all, if this is shown, then the liability for the crime may be imposed on any one of the persons in the same manner as if the act was done by him alone”.
The applicants state that the CBI court failed to appreciate the basic law of offence dealing with group liability or vicarious liability of members in offences related to Public Tranquillity. The application further states that the CBI court “failed to appreciate the basic facts that these attacks are not against any individual, they are meant to act as threat to an entire religious community charged by communal hatred”. It further states that “The idea is to intimidate and cause fear in the minds of minority, with an aim to instigate the community to react and thereby create a spiral or violence in which the control is with the hate-mongering groups of the majority community.”
The application also points out that the court has failed to take into consideration the law of conspiracy such that for concurrence, if the objective element of a crime is proved beyond reasonable doubt in combination with mens rea then it produces criminal liability. It is also alleged that the court ignored overwhelming evidence of guilt of accused persons proved by the statements of eye witnesses and corroborative evidence put on record.
The application states, “The core of the entire case emanates from promoting enmity between different persons on grounds of religion prejudicing maintenance of harmony amongst the citizenry. The applicants are the victims of consistent hate campaign manufactured by the accused persons to promote communalism-based hatred dividing the people on religious and racist lines to achieve their slanting and oblique motives.”
Related:
From Babri Mosque to Ram Temple: A historical perspective
“Temple restoration” suits on the rise; what about the Places of Worship Act?