ON July 16, the Delhi High Court declared as null and void a Delhi government notification proscribing the exhibition of a text panel delienating different versions of the Ramayana in the exhibition Ham Sab Ayodhya which was inaugurated in 17 cities in India on April 9, 1993. The text panel was proscribed from the Teen Murti House on August 21, 1993. A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Arajit Pasayat, Justice D K Jain and Justice C K Mahajan held:

"A bare reading of the note sheet sent to the then lieutenant governor of Delhi for his approval for issuing a notification banning the exhibition of two posters does not leave a shadow of doubt that there was no application of mind by the authority concerned."

Eight long years have passed during which SAHMAT stood accused under Section 153A (promoting enmity between different groups on account of religion, etc, and doing acts prejudicial to maintenance of harmony) and Section 295A (deliberate and malicious acts intended to raise religious feelings of any class by insulting its religion or its religious beliefs). The High Court has now, in this significant judgement, castigated the concerned authority for "merely acting as a rubber stamp" and declared that "there is no indication regarding existence of requisite ingredients of Section 153A and Section 295A IPC."

It may be recalled that SAHMAT had conceived a programme Muktnaad to counter the images of vandalism that the name Ayodhya had conjured since December 6, 1992. Over a thousand artists and scholars gathered in Ayodhya on August 15, 1993 for this programme. On August 9, symbolically coinciding with the Quit India Day, the week-long cultural programme was flagged off in 17 cities with the exhibition Hum Sab Ayodhya, depicting the geographical, historical, religious, architectural and cultural evolution of Ayodhya. The research work for the exhibition was done by distinguished historians including Irfan Habib, K N Panikkar, Ravinder Kumar, Athar Ali and Survira Jaiswal. The right-wing forces did not like this attempt to break their siege of Ayodhya. The Sangh Parivar floated several rumours designed to discredit Muktnaad.

On August 12, a 25-strong Bajrang Dal squad systematically ripped apart the exhibition panels while the police and paramilitary forces stood by watching. In the furore that followed the attack, the Bharatiya Janata Party, which jumped to the defence of its lumpen supporters, floated several lies about the exhibition. The attack on the exhibition, J P Mathur (BJP MP) claimed on August 18, was provoked by a poster depicting Ram and Sita as brother and sister, rather than as husband and wife. This charge was also made in parliament by party leaders L K Advani and Atal Behari Vajpayee. In both Ayodhya and Delhi, the rumour put out was that the poster showed Sita trying a rakhi on Ram, and that SAHMAT was alleging their relationship was incestuous. Unfortunately for the Hindu right, there was no poster representing Ram as Sita’s brother put up by SAHMAT in Faizabad or, for that matter, anywhere else.

What the Faizabad group of the Bajrang Dal had in fact stumbled upon was a four-page printed note, ensconced among 82 other exhibits, some showing artistic representations of the Ramayana legend from different periods in Indian history.

The judgement has found the proscription notification "indefensible" and directed it to be nullified. The judgement notes: "Everything was pre-designed and pre-determined." The competent authority was not even shown the material that was being proscribed.

The judgement is significant not only in that it vindicates SAHMAT’s position on Hum Sab Ayodhya; it also establishes pre-censorship as unconstitutional. Most importantly, it exposes the fact that the Hindu right-wing cannot succeed in its nefarious design of suppressing secular opinion and pluralist vision of Indian history and culture by the tactics of intimidating the administration of the day through rumour mongering, lumpen activities and Goebbelsian propaganda.