Retired Justice S Muralidhar slams judiciary over Ayodhya verdict aftermath, calling it “unforgivable institutional amnesia” while questioning delays, Article 142 directions, and the Babri Masjid demolition case.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition and the Ayodhya verdict continues to spark debate decades later. Recently, senior advocate and retired Justice S Muralidhar strongly criticized the judiciary’s handling of the case, calling it an example of “institutional amnesia” and questioning the basis of the Supreme Court’s judgment.
His remarks, delivered at the AG Noorani memorial lecture, shed light on judicial delays, media narratives, and the urgent need to uphold constitutional values in a pluralistic society.
Justice Muralidhar highlighted what he called “unforgivable institutional amnesia”, referring to the judiciary’s failure to hear a suo motu contempt petition against former BJP leader and Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Kalyan Singh for the destruction of the Babri Masjid.
“It was not taken up for 22 years. And then when it was listed before Justice (Sanjay) Kaul it was said why flog a dead horse. This is institutional amnesia, which in my view is unforgivable, of an act which the Supreme Court found was an egregious crime,”
Justice Muralidhar said.
This remark underlines the prolonged delays in the judicial process and the lack of accountability for one of India’s most controversial events in recent history.
Justice Muralidhar did not stop at procedural criticism. In a speech delivered at the AG Noorani memorial lecture at the India Islamic and Cultural Centre, he questioned the very basis of the Ayodhya judgment, pointing out that no one had requested the construction of a temple in the Supreme Court.
“Directions under Article 142 were issued – no one asked for it, no legal basis, no prayer, hence no opposition. No central government or Hindu group lawyer had asked for it, no issue on constructing a temple was there before it,”
he explained.
He added that the judgment was “completely outside the realm of the suits before it”, emphasizing that the aftermath of the Babri Masjid demolition is far from over, with 17 suits still emerging across the country despite the Places of Worship Act.
ALSO READ: Rouse Avenue Court to Hear ED Money Laundering Case Against Robert Vadra on Sept 20
Justice Muralidhar also expressed disappointment at the role of electronic media, which he said repeatedly focused on “Hindu-Muslim questions” rather than promoting pluralism. He stressed that India’s strength lies in its diversity and composite culture, not in homogenizing religious or cultural identities.
“India’s population is as diverse as it is also devout … We never were nor can be one culture, one language, or one religion.”
The retired judge cautioned against judges becoming entangled in personal religious beliefs or making them a spectacle. He echoed the opinion of Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia in the Hijab case, stating that getting into essential religious practices is a dangerous exercise for the judiciary, as it risks misinterpreting theological matters.
“Even as the judiciary, we need to look inwards. We don’t ask who our judges and what their religious beliefs are.”
Justice Muralidhar also aimed at former Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, who was widely seen as the author of the Ayodhya verdict. He noted that although the judgment was presented as “author-less,” Justice Chandrachud himself later admitted that he had “consulted the deity” before delivering it. Muralidhar cautioned that such public display of personal religious beliefs by judges is problematic, as it undermines judicial neutrality and risks eroding faith in constitutional values.
Justice Muralidhar concluded with a call to action for the future: the teaching of secularism and constitutional values must begin in schools to prevent fear and insecurity from shaping young minds. He warned that societal divisions often start with simple accusations among neighbours and friends, highlighting the need for civic education and awareness.
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Rahul Gandhi
