Muslims are not opposing Ram Temple in Ayodhya: Sri Sri

Agencies
November 16, 2017

Ayodhya, Nov 16: Spiritual guru Sri Sri Ravishankar on Thursday said by and large Muslims are not opposing Ram Temple in Ayodhya.

The Art of Living founder Sri Sri is here to mediate in the Ramjanambhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute between Hindus and Muslims.

"I know some may not agree with this, but Muslims by and large are not opposing the Ram temple," Sri Sri Ravishankar said while addressing the media here.

He expressed confidence that both the communities are capable of reaching to a solution over the issue.

"A solution may sometimes seem impossible, but our people, youth and leaders of both communities can make it possible," the spiritual guru said.

Earlier in the day, the Art of Living founder reached Ayodhya amidst high security.

Talking to media upon his arrival, Sri Sri said, "The environment is positive. People want to come out of this conflict. I know it is not easy. Let me talk to everyone. It is too early to reach a conclusion."

It is notable that the Supreme Court will hear the 13 appeals in the Ramjanmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute on December 5, 2017, the eve of the 25th anniversary of the demolition of the 15th century mosque.

In March, the apex court, however, suggested that it would be best if the contentious issue is settled amicably out of the court between concerned parties.

On Monday, Ramjanambhoomi and Babri Masjid issue grabbed headlines again when Sri Sri Ravi Shankar said he would open talks with stakeholders in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid dispute.

"I will be going to Ayodhya day after tomorrow (November 16), and so far, all talks have been positive," he said.

However, the spiritual guru's effort has got mixed reactions.

Uttar Pradesh Governor Ram Naik on Wednesday welcomed Sri Sri's mediation efforts but said the final word in the Ayodhya issue will be of the Supreme Court.

Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Yogi Adityanath has also welcomed the mediation by Sri Sri Ravishankar.

The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) national general secretary Ram Madhav downplayed Sri Sri's visit and said first let the legal process be completed in the Supreme Court after which other options should be explored.

Former BJP MP Ram Vilas Vedanti on Thursday alleged Sri Sri Ravi Shankar had "jumped" into the Ayodhya dispute to avoid probe into his illegal wealth.

BJP MP Sakshi Maharaj on Tuesday hailed Art of Living founder Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's offer to mediate in the Ayodhya dispute.

The president of All India Majlis-e-Ittehadul Muslimeen (AIMIM) Asaduddin Owaisi on Monday dismissed Sri Sri Ravi Shankar's mediation and said that the spiritual leader is no authority in this matter.

The All-India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) and the All-India Babri Masjid Action Committee (AIBMAC) have welcomed Sri Sri's mediation efforts but said Muslims will not surrender their claims on the land belonging to the Babri mosque.

Ram Janambhoomi- Babri Masjid dispute is century old point of tussle between Hindus and Muslims.

The mosque was demolished by Hindu Karsevaks on December 6, 1992 in Ayodhya. The country witnessed massive riots in which over 2000 people were killed.

The Hindus claim that it is the birthplace of Lord Rama where a mosque was built in 1528-29 CE (935 AH) by Mir Baqi. Since the mosque was built on orders of the Mughal emperor Babur, it was named Babri Masjid.

Two FIRs were filed after the disputed structure was demolished- Crime no. 197 deals with actual "demolition of the mosque by karsevaks." Crime no. 198 named senior Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders L.K. Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and others for 'communal' speeches before the demolition.

In May, a Special Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) court in Lucknow charged senior BJP leaders L.K Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Union Minister Uma Bharti with criminal conspiracy in Babri Masjid demolition case. They are facing trial in the conspiracy case almost 25 years after the Mughal-era mosque was demolished by kar sevaks.

All the accused were granted bail by the Court but it rejected the discharge petition and said charges would be framed against them.

Comments

Abdullah
 - 
Saturday, 18 Nov 2017

A big lier. In Zakir Naik case also he lied. Who the hell he is to talk about muslims!

 

 

SHARIEF
 - 
Thursday, 16 Nov 2017

Building mandir or mosque will have worst consequances. 

Dont give to any community. 

Build a large common eminity for people of all  religions.

 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
June 28,2020

Bengaluru, Jun 28: Karnataka Minister for Medical Education Dr K Sudhakar faced criticism by netizens after he shared a TikTok video sent by his daughter and wife, who are currently undergoing treatment in a COVID-19 facility.

TikTok is a Chinese video-sharing social networking service owned by ByteDance, a Beijing-based internet technology company founded in 2012 by Zhang Yiming.

Dr Sudhakar’s father, his wife and daughter who tested positive for Covid-19 has been admitted to a designated facility and in order to make his birthday memorable, his daughter sent him greetings through TikTok video.

When the minister shared the TikTok video, people pointed out that the minister should know better and that he should urge his family to boycott the Chinese video-sharing platform and lead by example.

Many were miffed that a BJP leader put up a TikTok video at a time when tensions are running high between India and China along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) in eastern Ladakh.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
coastaldigest.com news network
May 13,2020

Mangaluru, May 13: Union Minister and former Karnataka chief minister D V Sadananda Gowda today assured that he will exert pressure on the authorities concerned to operate more repatriate flights to bring back Kannadigas from Saudi Arabia to Karnataka. 

Speaking in a video conference organised by coastaldigest.com with Kannadiga delegates in Saudi Arabia, Mr Gowda said: “Today itself I will contact the external affairs ministry and Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) to convince them the need to add operate flights to bring back stranded Kannaidgas from the Kingdom.

After paying heed to the advices, requests and concerns of Kannadiga delegates that participated in the video conference, Mr Gowda said: “Two things need to be done. First thing is number of flights from Saudi Arabia to Karnataka should be increased. Second thing is to ensure that most of these flights land in the Mangaluru Airport as most of the Kannadiga expats in Saudi Arabia are from the coastal region.

“There should be at least two to three flights from Saudi Arabia to Karnataka (Bengaluru Airport or Mangaluru Airport) every week. That is my intention,” he added.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
News Network
February 19,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 19: Pointing out that there was a deliberate attempt to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at whim, the Karnataka High Court on Tuesday granted conditional bail to 21 people who were accused by police of involving in violence during the protests against the Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) in Mangaluru.

Allowing the bail petitions of Ashik and 20 others from Udupi and Dakshina Kannada districts, Justice John Michael Cunha said the overzealousness of the police is also evident from the fact that FIRs were registered under Section 307 of IPC against the persons killed by the police themselves.

“In an offence involving a large number of people, the identity and participation of each accused must be fixed with reasonable certainty. In the present cases, the identity appears to have been fixed on the basis of their affiliation to PFI and they being members of the Muslim community. Though it is stated that the involvement of the petitioners is captured in CCTV footage and photographs, no such material is produced before the court showing the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot, armed with deadly weapons,” the judge noted.

In the statement of objections filed by the State Public Prosecutor-I, it was stated that there was a hint of Muslim youths holding protest on December 19, 2019, opposing the implementation of CAA. Prohibitory orders were clamped in that connection. This assertion indicated that the common object of the assembly was to oppose the implementation of CAA and National Register for Citizens (NRC) which, by itself, was not an “unlawful object”, the judge pointed out.

‘Pics show cops throwing stones at crowd’

Justice Cunha also said the material collected by the investigators did not contain any specific evidence regarding the presence of any of the petitioners at the spot. On the other hand, omnibus allegations were made against the Muslim crowd of 1,500-2,000, alleging that they were armed with weapons like stones, soda bottles and glass pieces. The photographs produced by the SPP depicted that hardly any member of the crowd were armed with weapons, except one of them holding a bottle. In none of these photographs, police station or policemen were seen in the vicinity, the judge noted.

“On the other hand, photographs produced by the petitioners show that the policemen themselves were pelting stones at the crowd. The petitioners have produced copies of the complaints lodged by the dependants of the deceased who died due to police firing and the endorsement made thereon reveals that even though the law required the police to register independent FIRs in view of the specific complaint made against the police officers making out cognizable offences, the police have failed to register FIRs. This goes to show that a deliberate attempt is underway to cover up police excesses by implicating innocent persons at the whims and caprice of the police,” the judge observed.

In the wake of counter-allegations against the police and in the backdrop of their failure to register FIRs based on complaints lodged by the families of victims, the possibility of false and mistaken implication could not be ruled out, the judge said. In these circumstances, it would be a travesty of justice to deny bail to the petitioners and sacrifice their liberties to the mercy of the district administration and police. The records indicate that a deliberate attempt has been made to trump up evidence and to deprive the liberties of the petitioners by fabricating evidence. None of the petitioners have any criminal antecedents, the court said.

“The allegations levelled against the petitioners are not punishable with death or imprisonment for life. There is no direct evidence to connect them with the alleged offence. The investigation appears to be malafide and partisan. In the circumstances, in order to protect the rights and liberties of the petitioners, it is necessary to admit them to bail,” the judge said.

The petitioners were arrested and remanded in judicial custody after the anti-CAA protests on charges of being members of an unlawful assembly, armed with lethal weapons, attempting to set fire to the North Police Station in Mangaluru, obstructing the police from discharging their duties and causing damage to public property, etc., on December 19 in violation of the prohibitory orders. They moved the High Court as their bail pleas had been rejected by a sessions court in Dakshina Kannada.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.