![]() Q: What is the archaeological evidence to prove whether there was a pre-existing temple or not? A: Archaeologically there is enough evidence to say that below the controversial Babri mosque, there were temple remains. First is archaeological evidence, second is literary evidence and the third is the social issues. ![]() Q: What do you have to say about the Ayodhya case being heard in the Supreme Court? A: There are three important issues. He spoke to TOI on why he thinks Muslims should voluntarily hand over the land at Ayodhya. He maintains that there is enough archaeological proof of a grand temple below the Babri Mosque. KK Muhammed, former regional director, North, Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) was part of the team of archaeologists which had carried out the first excavation at the site in 1976-77. The Supreme court is holding day-to-day hearings on the Ram Janmbhumi-Babri Masjid case and is likely to give a verdict by November 17.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |