The gates of the Ram Janmabhoomi complex were unlocked so that Hindus might worship

Hindu worshipers are now permitted to pray within the closed crypt of the controversial Gyanvapi mosque, according to a district court ruling in Varanasi this week. Priests from the Kashi Vishwanath temple may lead the prayers in “Vyas Ka Tekhana,” a forbidden region within the controversial Gyanvapi mosque complex, in accordance with the court’s ruling.

The Hindu devotees arrived to the Gyanvapi location and performed aarti hours after the court’s decree.

The ruling by the Varanasi court brings to mind another ruling made about 37 years before by a district court in Ayodhya, which permitted Hindus to worship at the site of the former Babri mosque by opening the gates of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple complex.

AT THE RAM JANMABHOOMI-BABRI MASJID SITE: Worship

The Mughal emperor Babur’s general Mir Baqi is credited with building the Babri Masjid in 1528, according to historical accounts. According to Hindu belief, the mosque was constructed atop Ram Janmabhoomi, the site of Lord Ram’s birth.

The Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid location was the subject of centuries-long dispute between Hindus desiring to perform their rites there. Following the construction of Babri Masjid, the first known instance of Hindu worship at the location was in 1858. A group of Nihang Sikhs conducted hawan and puja after breaking inside the Babri mosque. The first FIR in relation to the case was also filed as a result of the occurrence.

A railing was built outside the mosque as a consequence of this tragedy. This was Ram Chabutra, a site of Hindu devotion that is said to be the precise birthplace of Lord Ram.

Mahant Raghubir Das, the main priest of the Ram Chabutra, launched a lawsuit in 1885 in an attempt to develop a temple on the property next to the mosque. Though the court dismissed his argument, Hindus persisted in their devotion at the Chabutra.

A district court declared the Babri mosque complex off-limits to prayer for both sides in 1949. This happened when an idol of Lord Ram arrived within the premises inexplicably; the Allahabad High Court subsequently determined that this was the intentional action of a Hindu priest.

The Ayodhya Movement and the Shah Bano Case
The Babri Mosque was kept off-limits to Muslims and Hindus alike for many years, despite legal actions brought by both parties claiming ownership of the property.

Rajiv Gandhi, who came to power at the Centre after his mother Indira Gandhi’s 1984 murder, was put in a difficult situation on the matter. To “liberate” the Janmasthan, the Vishva Hindu Parishad (VHP) has initiated a campaign.

On September 25, 1984, a rath yatra was organized by the VHP branch Shriram Janmabhoomi Mukti Yajna Samiti from Sitamarhi, the place where Sita is said to have appeared, to Ayodhya, the site of the first appeal to “liberate” Ram Janmabhoomi.

In the meanwhile, the VHP used the Rajiv Gandhi administration’s defiance of the Supreme Court’s ruling in the Shah Bano case as leverage to put pressure on the government over the Janmabhoomi issue.

In summary, Shah Bano, a Muslim lady who requested maintenance from her former husband under Section 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code—which applies to all Indian residents, regardless of religion—won her case in 1985 when the Supreme Court made its decision. However, hardline Muslim groups fiercely disagreed with the ruling, claiming it was against Islamic law. The Rajiv Gandhi-led government introduced an order to weaken the Supreme Court’s ruling in reaction to the criticism.

However, the Hindu community did not approve of this action, seeing it as caving in to the prejudices of the minority at the cost of the majority. The Congress administration looked for a resolution to the Ram Janmabhoomi conflict in order to offset the unhappiness and win back the support of the Hindu population.

HOW HINDUS COULD OPEN THE RAM JANMABHOOMI COMPLEX AGAIN
After a district judge’s decision on February 1, 1986, Hindus were able to pray inside the “disputed structure” of the mosque. Many people saw the Babri Masjid’s unlocking as a “balancing act” by the Congress administration, both in Uttar Pradesh and at the national level.

According to other sources, Rajiv Gandhi was not aware of the development, despite allegations that he had personally directed the UP administration to open the temple’s gates. Wajahat Habibullah, the former Chief Information Commissioner, suggests in his book ‘My Years with Rajiv: Triumph and Tragedy’ that influential government figures like Arun Nehru and ML Fotedar might have planned the decision without Rajiv Gandhi’s knowledge. Gandhi later claimed he was unaware of the action until it was carried out.

Umesh Chandra Pandey, a third-party attorney from Faizabad, made a petition that led to the court’s ruling. He requested that the gates of the contested temple be unlocked, arguing that the closure order had come from a previous district administration rather than a court.

The court judgment caused the shrine’s gates to open for Hindus, who offered prayers for the first time in 37 years. Because there was already extensive security in place, the Muslim side claimed that the decision was “pre-planned”.

Abdul Mannan, the Muslim side’s attorney, told India Today in 1986 that “everything was pre-planned as the state police and the Provincial Armed Constabulary (PAC) had been deployed much before the district judge had even pronounced his judgement.”

IMPACT OF OPENING GATES OVER TIME
The VHP and other Hindu organizations perceived a chance to further their cause with the inauguration of the Ram Janmabhoomi gate. The VHP held a shilanyas, or foundation-laying ceremony, for a Ram temple next to the site of the disputed mosque on November 9, 1989.

The decision to permit the Shilanyas was made by the Congress administration led by Rajiv Gandhi, and it was officially conveyed to Ashok Singhal, the head of the VHP, by Buta Singh, the Home Minister at the time.

Only a few days before the general elections started, there was a shilanyas ceremony.

Without fully contemplating the possible ramifications, such as the belief that this concession was a step towards the inevitable destruction of the Babri Masjid, which finally transpired on December 6, 1992, the Congress made a tactical move to stop its weakening grip over Hindu voters.

The BJP’s prospects also changed as a consequence of the Ram Mandir campaign; in the 1990 Lok Sabha elections, the party went from having only two MPs to 85 seats.

MATHURA, KASHI, AND AYODHYA
Following the Supreme Court’s 2019 ruling, which put an end to the Ayodhya Ram Mandir campaign, Hindu organizations are making concerted efforts to “reclaim” the Shahi Idgah mosque in Mathura and the Gyanvapi mosque in Varanasi, both of which they say originally housed temples.

In Varanasi, a district court has permitted Hindus to say prayers in the enclosed basement of the Gyanvapi mosque complex, much as the district court in Ayodhya. The Muslim side, dejected by the lower court’s ruling, appealed to the Supreme Court in an attempt to reverse the ruling, but they were requested to appear before a higher court.

Although the Muslims have shown patience and there haven’t been any communal confrontations since the Varanasi court’s ruling, it’s important to remember that the 1986 opening of the Ram Mandir gates served as a spark that set off a series of events. It was an important stage in the Janmabhoomi land reclamation project.