1. Home
  2. Muslims are not opposing Ram Temple in Ayodhya: Sri Sri

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

About text formats
  • 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
August 7,2020

Mangaluru, Aug 7: A youth died on the spot in a ghastly road mishap on Netravati Bridge near Thokkottu on the outskirts of the city today evening.

Police sources said that the face of the youth, who was riding a motorbike, has been damaged beyond recognition. He died on the spot. 

More details about the mishap are yet to be known. A case has been registered at Mangaluru Traffic police station.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
February 14,2020

Bengaluru, Feb 14: In a major embarrassment to the police, the Karnataka High Court has termed as illegal the prohibitory orders imposed under Section 144 of CrPC by the City Police Commissioner in December 2019 in the light of the anti-Citizenship Amendment Act (CAA) protests in Bengaluru.

The orders were passed “without application of mind” and without following due procedures, the court noted. Giving reasons for upholding the arguments of the petitioners that there was no application of mind by the Police Commissioner (Bhaskar Rao) before imposing restrictions, a division bench of the High Court said he had not recorded the reasons, except reproducing the contents of letters addressed to him by the Deputy Commissioners of Police (DCPs). 

The state government had contended that prohibitory orders were passed based on reports submitted by the DCPs who expressed apprehension about anti-social elements creating law and order problems and damaging public property by taking advantage of the anti-CAA protests.  

The High Court bench said the Police Commissioner should have conducted inquiry as stated by the Supreme Court to check the reasons cited by the DCPs who submitted identical reports. Except for this, there were no facts laid out by the Police Commissioner, the court said.

“There is complete absence of reasons. If the order indicated that the Police Commissioner was satisfied by the apprehension of DCPs, it would have been another matter,” it said.  

“The apex court has held that it must record the reasons for imposition of restrictions and there has to be a formation of opinion by the district magistrate. Only then can  the extraordinary powers conferred on the district magistrate can be exercised. This procedure was not followed. Hence, exercise of power under Section 144 by the commissioner, as district magistrate, was not at all legal”, the bench said. 

“We hold that the order dated December 18, 2019 is illegal and cannot stand judicial scrutiny in terms of the apex court’s orders in the Ramlila Maidan case and Anuradha Bhasin case,” the HC bench said while upholding the arguments of Prof Ravivarma Kumar, who appeared for some of the petitioners.   

Partly allowing a batch of public interest petitions questioning the imposition of prohibitory orders and cancelling the permission granted for protesters in the city, the bench of Chief Justice Abhay Shreeniwas Oka and Justice Hemant Chandangoudar observed that, unfortunately, in the present case, there was no indication of application of mind in passing prohibitory orders.

The bench said the observation was confined to this order only and it cannot be applicable in general. If there is a similar situation (necessitating imposition of restrictions), the state is not helpless, the court said.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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
April 17,2020

Bengaluru, Apr 17: Nikhil Kumaraswamy, son of former Karnataka Chief Minister HD Kumaraswamy, married Revathi, grand-niece of former Congress Minister for Housing, M Krishnappa, on Friday.

According to sources, more than 100 people participated in the marriage ceremony held at Kumaraswamy's farmhouse in Kethaganahally, Ramanagara.

There were around 50-60 members from former Prime Minister HD Deve Gowda's family and more than 30 people participated from Revathi's family, sources added.

This comes in the middle of a nationwide lockdown which has been imposed to deal with the coronavirus threat.

Earlier, HD Kumaraswamy had said that the marriage ceremony would be held behind closed doors in the presence of family members.

Nikhil Kumaraswamy, who contested the Lok Sabha election from Mandya, is also the national youth wing president of Janata Dal-Secular.

Comments

Add new comment

About text formats
  • 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.