A three-way split. If only they’d split it four ways…

Initial reports of the Ayodhya title suit verdict from the Allahabad High Court have been coming in. It seems that the three judges (two hindus, one muslim) agree that the land should be split among the three petitioners, but disagree about the proportions.

At least from what I’ve heard, the 1961 plaint from the Waqf board has been dismissed as having exceeded the statute of limitations (which basically means they didn’t appeal within a certain time limit), but the court has still decided that the land must be split between a shrine for the hindus, a mosque for the muslims and something called the nirmohi akhara.

I have a better option, courtesy Anubhab Roy: split it four ways. The hindus who are so inclined can pray to Ram. The muslims who are so inclined can pray to Allah. The nirmohi akhara can do whatever it is that it does. The fourth split should be land for a strip club. You know, prayer is hard work, and we all know there should be some play after hard work.

Go on, then, Messrs. Justices of the Allahabad High Court, give us a strip club. That would be as good a verdict as anything you might drum up.

Advertisements

14 thoughts on “A three-way split. If only they’d split it four ways…”

  1. I am disturbed with the way the court puts it. Atleast the way the news reports read.

    “Disputed site is the birthplace of Ram – Court”

    I mean what evidence do they have to prove it is Ram’s birthplace. Not to mention the question of the existence of “Ram”.

  2. hey ravi, i didnt post that comment !!!! i dont know how it came ?? i am worried, moreover thats not what i think. dude has anybody hacked my account !!!!!!!!

  3. Oh ! i guess thats some other adarsh 🙂 how can you know who is whom ?? i guess its dangerous to comment in the blog since there is no login id and photo. I feel its better to comment in fb.

  4. @ Adarsh-1, that isn’t the worst of it. I don’t know what the court has said, but they were considering whether the ‘appearance’ of an idol of Ram inside the mosque was a miracle or not.

    @ Adarsh-2, yes, welcome to my life. I know six Adarshes, five Anirudhas, four Vinays, and a dozen people called ‘Shorty’. I have to resort to my ‘miraculous’ powers to figure out who is who.

    In any case, though, ‘dangerous’ to comment in the blog? Really? You think somebody’s watching this blog, keeping track of who says what and is going to do something based on that? Paranoid much?

    @ Both, maybe you could use your initials when you comment here? Just a suggestion. I can figure out who’s saying what; I have miraculous powers, see, but other readers here don’t.

  5. @croor: Just before you posted your comments, the initials were not showing up. Miraculously, after you comment the initials start showing up. Much better now.

  6. @above: Yes, it was one of the questions to be addressed by the court. Its insane..

    @croor: Prakash was my classmate at BASE and NCB. Good times!

  7. @ the Prakash part, good. I saw you on his facebook.

    @ ‘above…’ you’re talking to Pushkarini. She’s senior to you. She’s old and doddy, even (by which I mean she’s in fifth year). You do know her? She must be TA for something.

    Shorty?

  8. Are you trying to hit on me, Mickey? We all know how well you do that, don’t we?

    The original idea had provisions for male strippers too, mostly because it was aimed at this female in the lab; but I suppose strippers won’t care who’s looking at them. You’d be welcome to go to the male stripper joint.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s