ISLAMABAD – Residents scrambled for emergency food when India’s SupremeCourt warned it would soon hand down a final verdict on a holy site thatprovoked some of the country’s worst sectarian violence.
Saturday’s ruling gave Hindus the right to build a temple in the city ofAyodhya, on land where a five-century-old mosque had stood until religiouszealots tore it down in 1992, sparking riots that killed 2,000 people –mostly Muslims.
“When the news broke on Friday night that the Supreme Court would give itsverdict, no-one knew what will happen. Everyone stocked up in case therewas violence,” said Janaka Lal Gupta, a 60-year-old Hindu who sellsreligious statues in the city of 450,000 people.
The price of vegetables and other staples skyrocketed in the local marketas security forces took over the city ahead of the ruling, but the fearedstorm did not come.
“It is finally over. Now there won’t be any more security lockdowns orsleepless nights,” Gupta told AFP.
The city’s Hindu population, who believe the site is the birthplace of thegod Rama, rejoiced after the verdict.
Houses and shops were decorated with the candles and oil lamps usuallyreserved for the religion’s Diwali light festival.
“I never thought I’d live to see this day,” said Ram Pyari, a frail80-year-old who owns a cosmetic shop.
“I remember the curfews, violence and fighting from my years growing up inAyodhya. Hopefully the future will be different,” she added.
India’s minority Muslim community were disappointed with the decision ofthe court, which also instructed the government to find an alternative sitefor a “prominent” new mosque.
Muslims across the country feel increasingly isolated under Hindunationalist Prime Minister Narendra Modi, who has campaigned for years fora temple at Ayodhya.
– ‘People have matured’ –
Read Top Stories
But Modi took a conciliatory stance even before the verdict was announced,saying the decision was not “a matter of victory or loss” for any side.
Hindus and Muslims in Ayodhya said they hoped to move on from thedecades-old dispute.
“All Ayodhya locals were anxious about the verdict,” said Mohammad Saleem,a 48-year-old Muslim beltmaker.
“But it’s a good judgment. People should finally be able to move away fromwhether it should be a temple or a mosque and focus on changing their livesand India’s economy.”
Ayodhya is one of the holiest pilgrimage sites for Hindus but the localeconomy is dependent on religious tourism and the city has suffered fromthe negative publicity caused by the 1992 mosque demolition.
Local infrastructure is dilapidated, with crumbling houses and templeslining the city’s main boulevards.
“A grand temple will be a boon for every person in the city and put us backon India’s pilgrimage map,” Shubham Maheshwar, a student living close bythe temple site, told AFP.
During the 1992 rioting and subsequent periods of tension, the city’sinhabitants spent long days locked up in their homes fearing unrestoutside, said 70-year-old shopkeeper Nand Lal Gupta.
“For months, we were dependent on government rations. As there was noviolence now, it shows that people have matured and things will finallyimprove,” he added. -APP/AFP
