Search the Internet          Tips

Kalyan had defended Ayodhya
demolition, insists Basu

Deposing before the Liberhan commission of inquiry into the Ayodhya dispute, Basu said that he had got Singh's speech, in Calcutta just after the demolition of the mosque, recorded as he wanted to know his views on the matter.

''Ayodhya mamle ko Supreme Court mein le jane ki avashyakta, auchitya aur upyogita nahin thi. Ise Supreme Court mein le jane ki avashyakta kyon pari jab ki prayapt proof tha ki us jagah pahle mandir tha (There was no need, justification and utility of taking the Ayodhya matter to the Supreme Court. Why it was taken to the Supreme Court at all when there was ample proof that a temple existed at the disputed site earlier),'' Singh had said in the speech, played before the commission.

He had also questioned a religious matter being adjudged by the court. The former chief minister had said when religion decides all matters of life like love, peace and amity and also sets up the ocial norms and values, how could the court decide a religious matter. He had said that the delaying in deciding the matter would not be in the interest of Hindus, Muslims or national unity and integrity.

Regarding the demolition, Singh had said that it was neither pre-planned nor done by using dynamite, but Ram Bhakt kar sevaks had finished the job in five hours. He had also called for constructing the temple as soon as possible.

The commission gave Singh's counsel time to go through the contents of the cassette so that he could cross-examine Basu on its contents on the next day of hearing, which would be either on March 15-16 or March 29-30 depending on the Marxist leader's schedule.

Besides the Bharatiya Janata Party and Singh, Basu also accused then Prime Minister Narasimha Rao for failure in protecting the mosque by just relying on Singh's assurance and not taking adequate steps for its protection. He said that two days before the actual demolition he had rang up Rao to warn him against a possible attack on the mosque and urged him to act.

Basu said that he had felt assured after Rao told him that he would take steps to protect the mosque. ''This was more so as Rao must have been getting intelligence reports about the possible attack on the mosque and the National Integration Council meeting on November 23, 1992 had also empowered the then prime minister to take all possible steps to protect it.

The former West Bengal chief minister said that despite being against the imposition of Article 356, at the NIC meeting, he and Communist Party of India-Marxists General Secretary H S Surjeet had suggested that President's rule be imposed in Uttar Pradesh if there was no other way to protect the mosque.

However, at the NIC meeting called to prevent attack on the mosque was not attended by any BJP leader, indicating their intentions, he pointed out.

However, when Basu confronted Rao in the third week of December as to why nothing was done by the latter to prevent the demolition, Rao said, ''How could I disbelieve the chief minister, who had assured me that no harm will be done to the masjid?''

''In view of the attitude of the BJP, Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh and Vishwa Hindu Parishad, I do not think that the prime minister should have relied only on the words of Singh. He must have got some reports from intelligence agencies about the apprehension of the attack on the mosque and should have used Article 356 to dismiss the government. The Government of India should have taken over and after restoring peace should have handed over the government to the BJP,'' Basu said.

On what steps, according to him, were required to control the crowd that had gathered in Ayodhya on December 6, 1992, Basu said, ''Any government worth its name, central or state, should know how to deal with such a situation. We have been dealing with such a riotous situations for 53 years.''

He said earlier such a gathering in Ayodhya was effectively controlled by Mulayam Singh Yadav. Though few people, who had mounted the mosque died in the firing, the mosque had been protected.

UNI

Back to top

Tell us what you think of this report