Senior Advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan: Inside the Ram Janmabhoomi Verdict | Off The Record

I began my career in legal journalism inside Courtroom No. 1 of the Supreme Court of India, covering all 40 days of the Ram Janmabhoomi hearing. It was August 2019. The monsoon session was on. And history was unfolding, argument by argument, in real time.

I remember the weight of that courtroom. The silences between submissions. The precision with which Senior Advocates chose their words. The discipline it took to argue faith without fanaticism, devotion without drama, and belief within the boundaries of constitutional law.

Six years after the November 9, 2019 verdict, I wanted to return to that moment, not as a reporter racing against deadlines, but as a journalist trying to understand what that case truly meant. What it took to argue it. What it cost to win it. And what it continues to mean for India’s legal and cultural consciousness.

That’s why this conversation with Senior Advocate C.S. Vaidyanathan matters.

As lead counsel for Ram Lalla Virajman, Vaidyanathan didn’t just argue a property dispute. He defended a civilizational claim, rooted in archaeology, oral history, devotion, and constitutional logic. He had to prove that a deity could hold legal personhood. That faith could be evidence. That secularism doesn’t mean erasing religion, but treating all religions with equal respect.

And he had to do all of this while the world watched.

In this episode of Off The Record, Vaidyanathan takes us inside that courtroom. He talks about the dignity with which the Bench heard both sides. The professionalism that kept emotions in check. The archaeological evidence unearthed beneath the disputed site. The juristic person debate that became central to the judgment. And why Article 142, the Supreme Court’s extraordinary power to do complete justice was necessary to close a wound that had bled for decades.

He also addresses Justice Chandrachud’s recent remarks about divine intervention, the media’s selective interpretation of those comments, and what finality of law actually means in a democracy where public debate never truly ends.

But beyond the legal arguments, what struck me most in this conversation was something else: the humility with which Vaidyanathan speaks about his role. He doesn’t claim the verdict. He doesn’t reduce it to a professional triumph. Instead, he calls it a civilisational victory that belongs to every Indian, Hindu, Muslim, or otherwise, who believes in the possibility of closure, reconciliation, and moving forward.

When I covered the hearings in 2019, I was struck by how little grandstanding there was. Both sides presented their cases with rigor. The Bench listened with patience. The judgment, when it came, was unanimous. And while not everyone agreed with it, the process itself was a demonstration of constitutional faith.

Now, as the Shri Ram Janmabhoomi Teerth Kshetra is complete, and as debates about secularism, history, and identity continue to shape our national discourse, I wanted to revisit that moment with someone who was at the center of it all.

Vaidyanathan’s reflections are not triumphalist. They are measured, grounded, and deeply respectful of the process. He draws a clear line between invaders and Indian Muslims. He defends the idea that reclaiming a sacred site is not an act of aggression but an act of restoration. And he reminds us that true secularism is not about suppressing faith, but about ensuring that the state treats all faiths equally.

This conversation is not about reopening old wounds. It’s about understanding how law, faith, and history converged in one of the most significant constitutional exercises in modern India. It’s about acknowledging that some cases transcend the courtroom and enter the realm of collective memory.

I hope this episode offers you the same clarity, depth, and perspective that covering those 40 days gave me at the start of my career. And I hope it reminds you that great legal advocacy is not about noise, it’s about precision, humility, and respect for the process.

Thank you for watching.