Ramjanmabhumi: Hinduizing Politics and Militarizing Hindudom 133court that a limited-scale puja could be allowed without violating the 1994
Supreme Court judgment, the court forbade "religious activity of any kind
by anyone either symbolic or actual including bhumi puja or shila puja"
and also forbade the government of India from handing over any "part"
of the acquired land to "anyone." Nor shall "any part of this land be per-
mitted to be occupied or used for any religious purpose or in connection
therewith."^85 The case was adjourned for 10 weeks and would be placed
before a larger bench.
On March 15, the prime minister sent an official in the Prime Minister's
Office (PMO) to receive the shila after a puja as a step toward the building
of the temple. According to the Statesman, the PMO official handed over
the pillars to the additional district magistrate (ADM) "with the instruc-
tion that they be the first stone slabs for construction of a temple when-
ever it is and put on plinth."^86 The VHP hailed this as an indication of the
government's acceptance in principle of the demand for a Ram temple.
On March 16, Prime Minister Vajpayee claimed the accepted shila would
be used only if the Supreme Court verdict in the title suit went in favor of
the Hindus. While claiming that "the court is the final authority," he also
called for a negotiated settlement as the issue should not be allowed to
"become a festering wound."^87 On the same day, a 500-strong mob of VHP,
Bajrang Dal, and Durga Vahini activists stormed the Orissa state assembly
building to demand the disputed land in Ayodhya and worsened the com-
munal tensions in the country. The future program of the temple move-
ment was discussed at the two-day meeting of the VHP's margdarshan
mandal at Hardwar beginning on June 22, 2002. Claiming that the 100-day
yagna was a success, the VHP decided to launch a Ram naam japa yagna in
every village.
In February 2003, the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB)
decided to oppose the government's plea before the Supreme Court for
vacation of stay on religious and other activities on the 67 acres of land
the central government had acquired. In March 2003, per the directives of
the Allahabad High Court to seek evidence whether or not a temple had
existed in the area where the Babri Masjid stood, the Archaeological Sur-
vey of India (ASI) began excavations at the disputed site.
The VHP refused to commit to giving up the claim on the disputed site
if the excavations failed to establish the existence of a temple or religious
structure at the place. Instead, the VHP's international general secretary,
Pravin Togadia, wanted the Muslims to hand over to the Hindus "at least
three of the 30,000 shrines—Ayodhya, Kashi and Mathura" the Muslims
had taken over, and if that was not done voluntarily, the "VHP does not
know what will happen." On earlier occasions, Togadia had threatened
a "civil war."^88 Organizing a trishul diksha (trident distribution) program
around UP, the VHP made it clear that the evidence gathered during the
excavation in Ayodhya would not affect the temple construction. As it was