<!– /11440465/Dna_Article_Middle_300x250_BTF –>Ram Vilas Vedanti, a former BJP MP and an accused in the Babri mosque demolition case, today claimed it was he and not the BJP patriarch L K Advani who incited the frenzied karsevaks to pull down the disputed shrine. “I demolished and got demolished the disputed structure, the ruin that stood there. The accusations against L K Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Rajmata Vijayaraje Scindia are wrong,” he said.Vedanti’s remarks came two days after the Supreme Court resurrected the conspiracy charge against Advani, Joshi and union minister Uma Bharti in the Babri Masjid demolition case. Vedanti said, in fact, Advani, Joshi and Scindia even took the microphone from him and tried to persuade the karsevaks to come down from atop the structure and leave. They even made the plea in English, he later told a TV news channel.Vedanti said he, Mahant Avaidyanath, also a former BJP MP, and VHP leader Ashok Singhal exhorted the karsevaks to raze the disputed structrue. Both Avaidyanath and Singhal are now dead.He told India Today TV channel he was prepared to be “hanged” for the cause of Ram temple. When asked was his claim an effort by him to “derail” the trial against BJP veterans, Vedanti said,” I have spoken about this earlier too.”Earlier on April 19, the Supreme Court allowed the CBI’s appeal in the Babri Masjid demolition case and restored criminal conspiracy charges against the BJP veterans Lal Krishna Advani, Murli Manohar Joshi and Uma Bharti besides Rajasthan Governor Kalyan Singh. However, Kalyan Singh, who was the chief minister of Uttar Pradesh in 1992, enjoys constitutional immunity as the Rajasthan Governor and can be tried only after he leaves office. The apex court ordered that two separate cases in Lucknow and Raebareli against Advani, Joshi and Bharti and unknown ‘kar sevaks’ shall be brought together in one trial. The Supreme Court also directed the trial court in Lucknow to commence the proceedings in four weeks and hear the matter on a day-to-day basis so as to complete the hearing in two years. The apex court also said there will be no ‘de novo’ (fresh) trial.The CBI has been ordered to ensure that at least one prosecution witness appears in the trial court for recording of testimony. To ensure speedy trial, the top court has given two important directions – first, no party shall be granted adjournments without the sessions judge being satisfied of the reasons for it; second, the trial judge hearing the case shall not be transferred till the judgement is delivered. The Supreme Court also said that its order should be followed in letter and spirit. If the parties involved feel that the top court’s order is not being followed in letter and spirit then they will be having the liberty to approach the apex court.
See the original article here: