The Indian Supreme Court has rendered its final verdict in the long-standing Babri Masjid dispute in Ayodhya. In a unanimous decision, the court allowed the construction of a temple on the site despite ruling the earlier demolition of the mosque illegal. As compensation, the court gave Muslims an alternate piece of land to build a mosque. The verdict is a political judgment that preserves peace, life, and property. We can also view it as a triumph of faith over the law. The Court could have exercised judicial independence, ignored majority public opinion, and decided the case purely as a land dispute. But, by choosing not to do so, it preserved fragile communal peace in the country. I think a judgment not favoring the majority would have triggered yet another bloody communal pogrom in India. We should remember that communal riots claimed the lives of nearly 2,000 people, mostly Muslims after Hindu extremists tore down the mosque in 1992. I support the court’s decision with that horrific thought in mind. “We will all build the temple together”. “We want to end the dispute,” the RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat said, welcoming the Supreme Court verdict. With millions of members, the RSS, a right-wing umbrella organization, is riding an emotional wave. It has successfully inserted the gods in the national discourse and judicial debate. The RSS are the main proponents of Hindu nationalism or Hindutva. The group was wildly jubilant over the Ayodhya ruling. Hindu extremists also have control of the national narrative projecting the peacefulness, superiority, and enlightenment of Hinduism. Much like Western critics, they present Islam as a backward and violent religion The RSS also has an ongoing project to re-write history to prove the superiority of India’s Hindu past. Its aggressive nationalist agenda has put secular, rational, and humanist Indians on the defensive. Critics of Hindutva are afraid to speak out about its excesses for fear of reprisals. As the RSS goes about avenging history, it could be leading India to a violent future. The Supreme Court decision on the Ayodhya dispute sought to avoid this dire prediction. The Muslim minority sees the verdict as yet another defeat. “It has served neither equity nor justice,” said senior lawyer ZafaryabJilani, who represented the Muslim body in the court. Despite concerns over fairness, Muslims have accepted the verdict with general resignation, muted criticism, and a certain sense of relief. Some in the Muslim community feel that Prime Minister Modi’s government is hostile, expecting more adverse conditions for themselves. Modi himself applauded the court’s decision as fair and balanced. “The nation’s highest court has delivered its verdict in Ayodhya case. We must not see this verdict as either victory or loss. It does not matter if you are a Hindu or Muslim, it’s time to strengthen the Indian polity,” Modi said. Some may see Modi’s healing touch as pretense bearing in mind the strong support he enjoys from the RSS cadres. Some media outlets see the Ayodhya verdict as a major boost for Modi and the ruling BJP. But dealing with a slowing economy and increasing unemployment are more important to the prospects of the ruling party. The economy generally matters more to voters than the nationalist fervor. It disturbs one to see that even in a deeply democratic India, superstition and bigotry could prevail. I am sure that the recent turn of events would appall India’s first leader, the great internationalist, Jawaharlal Nehru. Nehru firmly opposed communalism and the use of religion for political gains. The state that Nehru had dreamed of had space for all religions and non-believers without privileging any. Now, leaders of the Hindu far-right want to dispense with Nehru’s ‘imported’ ideology of a secular democratic state. Hindu extremists also have control of the national narrative projecting the peacefulness, superiority, and enlightenment of Hinduism. Much like Western critics, they present Islam as a backward and violent religion. Their strategy is to pin present-day Muslims with the ‘barbarism’ and ‘vandalism’ of past Muslim rulers. The big question, is where does India go from here? I disagree with the view that Hindutva forces do not pose a threat to the firmly rooted Indian secular democracy and pluralism. It will only embolden Hindu nationalists if more high profile verdicts like Ayodhya go their way, and they continue to get a free pass to spread their virulent propaganda under the guise that there is nothing wrong in the world’s largest democracy. As India searches for elusive 21-century modernity, its political, judicial, and executive institutions must stand up for the rights of all citizens, regardless of caste, race, sex, and religion. Part of this process includes keeping the peace but also the exercise of fair and good governance. India’s institutions should remember that the rights of minorities – including the prohibition of discrimination based on religion – are enshrined in India’s constitution. The writer is an analyst and commentator on politics, peace, and security issues