Search the Internet            Tips

Sudershan disowns 'explosion' theory

Josy Joseph in New Delhi

The right-wing juggernaut continued to roll at the M S Liberhan Commission for the second day on Wednesday, as Rashtriya Swamsevak Sangh Chief K S Sudershan recorded his statement on the demolition of the Babri Masjid on December 6, 1992.

He disowned national media reports quoting him as saying that the mosque was brought down by an explosion. He claimed the demolition was the result of the Narasimha Rao government's failure to "appreciate the depth of public sentiments" and its attempt to see the "entire matter through a legal and political prism."

On Tuesday, Union Minister of State for Sports Uma Bharti recorded most of her statement, in which she claimed that excited kar sevaks were not ready to listen to appeals of leaders such as Murli Manohar Joshi and L K Advani and went ahead and demolished the mosque.

Sudershan said he was quoting from a letter by a senior Maharashtra Congress leader (who reportedly refused Sudershan permission to identify him, but allowed him to make public the letter's contents), in which he had quoted Gandhian Nirmala Deshpande as having spoken of an explosion.

"I did not make any observation on my own, but only quoted statements of others," he said.

Once he quoted Deshpande's explosion theory at Thiruvananthapuram on December 8, the imagination of journalists' blew up the issue. "They converted an explosion into a blast, and a blast was converted into a bomb blast. And the story was carried. And it was put into my mouth," he told the commission.

On Deshpande's interviews and recent denials of having spoken anything about an explosion inside the mosque, Sudershan said she had repeated three points in her statements:
* The top BJP leadership was appealing to kar sevaks to descend from domes. The leaders were helpless because matters were out of control.
* Hired experts had been smuggled inside the Babri masjid and they, rather than the 200,000-strong mob, demolished the structure.
* Explosives may or may not have been used.

Sudershan gave a new twist to the controversy, claiming that a Ghaziabad-based politician, Kumar Dharam Vir Singh Rawal, had written to the then Lok Sabha speaker, claiming that Anees Ahmed Gehlot, a lawyer and president of the Muslim Rajput Sabha, had claimed he planted bombs in the masjid. Gehlot was murdered in 1997, he said.

He said Kashmir Panthers Party chief Bhim Singh had expressed similar views.

However, Sudershan refused to support any claims, after disowning reports attributing a similar theory to him. He requested the commission to summon Rawal to depose before it.

In the letter to the speaker, Rawal said Gehlot had been claiming at his meetings that three small brick-shaped slabs of dynamite and detonators, with the words 'Shri Ram' written, were placed inside the masjid on December 6, 1992.

Gehlot has been quoted by Rawal as having said: "I, along with some inmates, went to Ayodhya as a kar sevak to blow up the mosque which Babar built against Koranic laws. I got some bombs built in the shape of puja bricks and tested them. The bombs had dynamite and detonators. I took the foremost position in the kar sevaks' procession. I had the bombs in plastic covers, which I tore open once I reached the domes, placed the bombs at pre-planned spots and blasted them at the appointed time. Before the blasts, I shouted: " Dhoor hato , bomb phat raha he."

Sudershan went on to give his own reasons for the demolition.

"The Central Government did not appreciate the depth of public sentiments. And attempted to see the matter through a legal and political prism," he said, as part of his inconclusive deposition.

"Ever since 1984, when the Ram Janmabhoomi movement started, the depth of public sentiments on this has been manifested through democratic means. First and foremost, the unlocking of the Ram Janmabhoomi mandir. In that connection all over the country at different places, Ram namki raths were taken out and people were sought to be informed that our God still remains locked," he said.

He said due to mass sentiments, the government told the court that it had no objection to open the locks, and so in 1986 the locks were opened.

Thereafter, all sandhu, sants felt that the building housing the Ram Lalla "was not in conformity with the dignity and prestige of Ram Lalla."

"And therefore a magnificent Ram temple should be built there. Accordingly, sadhu, sants went around the country awakening people. A little before 1989, Ram shila pujan programmes were conducted from village to village," he said. And Ram shilas reached Ayodhya in thousands. "This was the second, completely democratic mass programme, through which sentiments of the Hindu community were manifested."

It was during this period that Sri Sompura, who played a key role in rebuilding the Somnath temple, designed the proposed Ram temple.

"Thereafter, a demand arose for laying the shilanyas of the Ram mandir, for which the sants fixed a date," he said, pointing out that several obstacles were created by various people. "Someone called it communal; someone called it anti-Muslim; someone described it as politically inspired," he pointed out.

He said the Muslim leadership always shied away, or left halfway, from dialogue to find a meaningful solution.

He said during the chief ministership of Mulayam Singh Yadav in Uttar Pradesh in 1991, the kar sevaks reached Ayodhya despite the Samajwadi Party leader's claim that "even a bird would not be able to flutter its wings" in Ayodhya.

''And therefore in the end, everyone reached Ayodhya, there was heavy firing; approximately 54-55 kar sevaks were killed and 300-400 were injured. But they hoisted saffron flags over the disputed structure," the father figure of the Hindutva family said.

With sacrifices by so many people "the mass sentiments concerning the Ram Janmabhoomi temple became particularly intense."

He said as part of the Narasimha Rao government's attempt to wriggle out of the controversy, then defence minister Sharad Pawar, Union minister Rangarajan Kumaramangalam and senior Bharatiya Janata Party leader Bhairon Singh Shekawat had met RSS chief Rajendra Singh in Bombay at Pawar's residence.

"It was suggested that a decision be obtained before December 6, from the court (Allahabad High Court)," Sudershan said. Kumaramangalam said it would not be difficult as the chief justice of the Allahabad High Court was his relative.

"At that point, Pawar spoke to Narasimha Rao and told him this was possible. The four set off for Delhi in Pawar's plane. Shekhawat alighted at Jaipur," Sudershan said.

As Sudershan could not complete his narration of the behind-the-scene politics that culminated in the demolition of the mosque, the commission asked him to re-appear on February 6.

The RSS chief spoke in Hindi, correcting the commission counsel, who translated for him.

The commission directed Bharti to reappear on January 15 and 16 to continue her deposition. Advani has been asked to appear on January 22 and 23, followed by Narasimha Rao on February 19 and 20.

EARLIER REPORT:
Sudershan denies bomb blast theory

Back to top

Tell us what you think of this report