The SC's judgement on the Ayodha case of Land title.

Today's SC decision on the case of Ayodha Land Title is totally in favour of one side. What was ASI report? As ASI does not say in its report of more than 4k page that under Babari mosque site, structure related to what found. It was never published out in public domain after 2002. As ASI found a structure under the disputed site. Tampering in it is too possible. The SC has given order to give land of Babari Mosque to the Hindu through a Trust. And the UP govt will allot a piece of land to Sunni Waqf Board for building a Mosque. Placing Ramlala idol at already existed religious site in 1949 was illegal, demolishing Babari Mosque was violation of law. There is no namaz at the site after 1949. But there is no worship at the site before 1949. If you put an idol illegally at already existed a religious site becomes the right of worship. And later Illegal placing of an idol became a claim of title of land. Demolishing the mosque structure is another illegal attempt to claim for Land title is justified by the SC. Temple was not demolished to built Mosque is not accepted as a claim of title. But Mosque was not built on the vacant land is became a base of rejecting claim of other for the land title. In a democratic country if an order of establishing a trust comes through the SC, the trust should be a secular one not a religious trust. Setting up a trust for temple is totally a decision on the basis of religious faith. Alternative land site for Mosque is not a religious faith. Placing idol at the desire site is became a matter of religious faith. But demolishing a religious structure is not religious faith. The Sc said in its decision that Ramlala is a legal entity. It means God is a legal one. Order of the SC for setting up a trust for temple is validated that a religious belief is not an individual matter but it a legal collective faith. Will a temple give clean air, pure drinking water, food, house and freedom from any kind of violence, torture and illegal disturbance. It is a decision under political influence. The decision is not based on the light of fact but in fear of faith. ASI reports may become another case of mosque dispute as Mathura, Kashi, etc. Today's decision of the SC is opening pandora box of other disputed mosques or any such minority sites. It is not a judgement but a decision.