On Wednesday, The Supreme Court has started hearing arguments over the critical issue of Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi disputed land. This time concern is related to send the ownership issue of 3 acres land to a five-judge bench. Hindu and Muslim communities are in a 70-year-old legal battle over this disputed land.
After the death of M Siddiq, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan has replaced him for legal processing. A three-judge bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and S Abdul Nazeer and Justices Ashok Bhushan took into account further arguments. Advocate Dhavan argued that this matter should be sent to a larger bench because a bench of five judges in Ismail Faruqui case had given an incorrect decision that Muslims do not require a mosque to pray.
In the case of Ismail Faruqui, the Supreme Court had said that Muslims don’t require a mosque to pray. If we go by this then there will be no point remaining in arguments of Muslim community in this dispute of land. Currently, this land is acquired by the Centre as the government has passed one ordinance which later converted as a law on January 7, 1993.  This was done just after one month of mosque demolition by right-wing mob in the presence of top BJP leaders.
Advocate Dhavan argued, “This decision is a fallacious declaration and it should be reconsidered by the Supreme Court. I object over this statement that was given by SC. Statement like Muslims can pray anywhere, can’t be consider unbiased. This judgment guides us that only Hindu community has right to pray at a well structured temple and this looks like a complete ignorance of the rights of Muslim community in the country.”
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan further said that Babri Masjid was rebuilt in 1937 by the British administration. In 1986, the locks of its gate were illegally opened and few idols were placed by some criminals. This mosque was then illegally demolished. Muslim’s right to pray there was illegally taken away by criminal mind people.
He further argued that the judgment in the Ismail Faruqui case was completely an injustice. A mosque is a property of Allah and it continues to exist like that even if got demolished by some fools. This will be called an absolute injustice if we rule out the importance of mosques in Muslim culture. Over that, government has acquired that land. Can it be done for Tirupati or Meenakshi temple? Can the government show same courage in case of temples too? If there is any decency in our secular system, then the mosque should be rebuilt there.   
Adding into his argument, advocate Dhavan said that Article 25 of the Constitution says that every mosque was essential to the right of worship. This same article also mandates that all religious places are to be treated with reverence. Thus, there should not be any need of proving the importance of Babri Masjid for Muslim community. This one is as important as the other one lac mosques in our country.
Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan will continue arguments on March 23.