For all those holding their breaths for a court verdict on the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title suits, we suggest another round of applause. These gentlemen, at their prime in the early-mid-90s, may just get another spot under the Ayodhya sun come mid-September when the Allahabad High Court is scheduled to decide who owns a plot of land in Uttar Pradesh. Anyone who had nothing better to do in the last 60 years than to follow a property dispute that, after December 6, 1992, led to one of independent India's most widespread and bloody sectarian outbreaks — and the firming up of a fringe political party — will be wondering who among four existing title suits will come out beaming.
The problem about the case is that it's not so much about who wins, but about who loses. Decades down the line — and 18 years after goons with time on their hand and a push from some ambitious folks — swung the pendulum in favour of Hindus who believed that India's second largest religious majority as being spoilt by a votebank-savvy party.
Things have moved on considerably since Ram was pitted against a defunct 16th century mosque. The fact that blood was shed across India over something that's closer to Amar Chitra Katha territory, tells a beguiling story of the level in which 80s-90s national politics had sunk to. But in 2010 India, issues have changed. Those who made a profession out of the theological debate are now redundant. So we hope the judges in Allahabad mull over the decision for a few decades more while keeping Latin terms like status quo in mind as authorities send in troops to Ayodhya just to be on the safe side. We're pretty sure that the patience of both Ram and Rahim will hold for some time longer. But will the oped writers weaned on Ayodhya keep themselves occupied by sticking to more pressing issues?