Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid Judgment Was Not Written by Judges, But by an "External Force"! Lawyer Mehmood Pracha's Explosive Allegations

New Delhi: Ambedkarite lawyer, Activist and National Convenor of Mission Save Constitution, Mehmood Pracha has made serious and shocking allegations regarding the Supreme Court's historic verdict in the Ayodhya Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi case, which raise fundamental questions about the judiciary's processes and credibility.

In a detailed conversation with GM News Network, Pracha claimed that the 2019 verdict, which paved the way for the construction of the Ram Temple, was not actually written by the five-judge Constitution Bench that delivered it, but was drafted by an "external force." He launched a severe attack on the judges, including former Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, raising grave questions ranging from judicial procedure to ethics.

The Core of the Judgment: "No Evidence, No Right, Yet the Land Was Given"

Pointing out the internal inconsistencies of the verdict, Pracha said the judgment itself admits that the parties representing the Babri Masjid did not argue the case properly. In his words, "The judgment was that firstly, the Babri Masjid side did not present their case properly. They fought the case with the intention to lose. This is clearly written in the judgment itself for anyone who reads it carefully."

But his biggest question is why, despite these circumstances and despite the Hindu side failing to provide any concrete proof that the mosque was built by demolishing a temple, the verdict was in their favour. He asks, "But still, the Hindu side could not provide any evidence that a mosque was built there by demolishing a temple. But still, 'give it to them'... If they didn't even have the right, then why are they being given five acres of land? It means they are distributing it. 'We are the owners, brother. We will give five acres of land.' Why was it given?" For Pracha, this is the essence of the entire verdict.

The Biggest Revelation: "Chandrachud Said He Received Directions Before an Idol"

The most explosive aspect of this entire matter is the allegation made by Pracha against Justice D.Y. Chandrachud. Pracha claimed that Chandrachud, while serving as Chief Justice, gave a speech in Maharashtra where he revealed the secret of this judgment.

According to Pracha, "Mr. Chandrachud went to Maharashtra and gave a speech there, he revealed the secret that this judgment was not written by any judge. 'I was sitting before the idol, before my God, and from there I received the direction for the judgment, and that is the judgment.'"

This statement, if true, not only questions the validity of this particular verdict but also strikes at the fundamental principles of the judicial process. Pracha has filed a civil suit based on this very ground. He says, "So Mr. Chandrachud himself has admitted. He did not write the judgment. On this basis, I have filed a civil suit that the Babri Masjid judgment was written by an external force, not by the judges in accordance with the Constitution. This case is still pending in Patiala House."

Pracha launched a direct attack on Justice Chandrachud's intelligence and competence, making an extremely harsh remark. "I am saying this to Mr. Chandrachud, if he were not a judge, he wouldn't have gotten a peon's job anywhere, given his level of understanding," he said.

He accused the judiciary of familial dominance, stating, " Chandrachud and his father had been a CJI. And his son will also become one. They have used all their power." Pracha claimed that judges of the Bombay High Court in Mumbai told him that Chandrachud's son practices there and that when Chandrachud was the Chief Justice, the path was made easier for his son. "Now his son will also become a Chief Justice if he becomes a judge now. But he has the merits for it. This one doesn't. There's no straight answer to this," he quipped sarcastically.

Pracha presented a list of alleged 'rewards' received by the judges after the verdict. Pracha alleges that after delivering this verdict, Justice S. A. Nazir was made a Governor, Justice Ranjan Gogoi was nominated to the Rajya Sabha, and Justice Chandrachud received benefits like allotments.

Two Camps in the Judiciary: 'Chandrachud Lobby' vs. 'Loya Category'

Pracha explicitly referred to two factions within the country's judiciary. He said, "In this country, there are two categories of judges. One is Mr. Chandrachud and his group, and the other is Justice Loya and people like him."

According to him, "Mr. Chandrachud is part of a whole large group of judges who are the complete opposite of Justice Loya. A very vocal member of this group is Justice Yashwant Verma." Referring to the allegations in the cash-for-judges case against Justice Yashwant Verma, Pracha said the government is using all its power to save him, and whichever judge is helping him is part of the 'Chandrachud lobby,' while those who are against him fall into the 'Justice Loya category.'

Systemic Problem: "Law Researchers Write Judgments, Judges Just Sign Them"

Placing his criticism in a broader context, Pracha pointed to a major problem in today's judiciary. He claimed that many judges now do not write their own judgments; instead, this work is done by their law researchers.

He explained, "Now everyone has kept law researchers. Who are lawyers with one or two years of experience... Now you tell me, what kind of research is to be done for a judgment? If a judge tells a researcher, it means he is telling him which way his mind is working, right? To a two-year-old child... he gave his mind, didn't he? This is the kind of judgments coming out."

He said these researchers are paid ₹80,000 per month and are made to work day and night. "When they are doing so much work... what the judges must be doing, I don't want to say more than this," he said. According to Pracha, this is why judges are often unaware of their own judgments and get caught out when giving statements to the media, as happened with Chandrachud.