The Babri Mosque (Template:Lang-hi, Template:Lang-ur), Babri Masjid or Mosque of Babur was a mosque in Ayodhya, on Ramkot Hill ("Rama's fort"). It was destroyed in 1992 during a riot involving 150,000 Hindu nationalists,^[1] despite a commitment to the Indian Supreme Court that the mosque would not be harmed.^[2][3] The mosque was constructed in 1527 by order of Babur, the first Mughal emperor of India.^[4][5] Before the 1940s, the mosque was called Masjid-i Janmasthan ("mosque of the birthplace").^[6] The mosque It is alleged Babur's commander-in-chief, Mir Baqi, destroyed an existing temple at the site, which some Hindus believe was the temple built to commemorate the birthplace of Rama, an incarnation of Lord Vishnu and ruler of Ayodhya (see Ram Janmabhoomi). The Babri Mosque was one of the largest mosques in Uttar Pradesh, a state in India with some 31 million Muslims.^[7] Although there were several older mosques in the city of Ayodhya, an area with a substantial Muslim population, including the Hazrat Bal Mosque constructed by the Shariqi kings, the Babri Mosque became the largest, due to the importance of the disputed site.

Some historians claim that there was no original temple in Ayodhya (despite the fact that according to Ramayana, Ayodhya was the birthplace and capital of Sri Rama) - but whether the Ayodhya of today is also the Ayodhya of the Ramayana is open to debate. The ancient Hindu scripture Brahma Purana [4.4.91] cites Ayodhya as the premier city of the six holy cities - (the other being Mathura, Haridvar, Kashi, Kanchi and Ujjain). The great Saint-Poet Tulsidas commenced the writing of his Ramayana (Shri Rama Charit Manas) in Ayodhya, in 1574. The earliest known inscription to testify worship of Rama is found in the Nasik cave inscription dating back to AD 150. evolution of the tradition of Shri Rama worship at least from AD 300 is established by the early shrines surviving at ancient Ramagiri hills, 30 km from Nagpur.

Prior 1857 hindus and muslims used to pray together in the mosque, it was a place of religious harmony. In his booklet, Communal History and Rama's Ayodhya, Professor Ram Sharan Sharma writes, "Ayodhya seems to have emerged as a place of religious pilgrimage in medieval times. Although chapter 85 of the Vishnu Smriti lists as many as fifty-two places of pilgrimage, including towns, lakes, rivers, mountains, etc., it does not include Ayodhya in this list."^[8] Sharma also notes that Tulsidas, who wrote the Ramcharitmanas in 1574 at Ayodhya, does not mention it as a place of pilgrimage.^[8] After the demolition of Babri Masjid, Professor Ram Sharan Sharma along with Historians Suraj Bhan, M.Athar Ali and Dwijendra Narayan Jha came up with the Historian's report to the nation on how the communalists were mistaken in their assumption that there was a temple at the disputed site and how it was sheer vandalism in bringing down the mosque and the book has been translated into all the Indian languages.^[9] However this view is disputed, as archeological surveys conducted by the Archaeological Survey of India under BB Lal, although initially published as finding no significant structures, subsequently put forward evidence, which is disputed, of a pre-existing temple predating the mosque by hundreds of years. The 574-page report, which has given a summary of the results of digging in Chapter X, says that a monumental structure existed just below the disputed structure from the 10th century onwards. It also mentions that the stone, decorated bricks and 50 pillar bases, which are distinctive features of temples in north India, were found-at the site. The report further says, "Now viewing it in totality and taking into account the archaeological, evidence of a massive structure just below the disputed structure and evidence of continuity in structural phases from the tenth century onwards up to the construction of the disputed structure along with the yield of stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of divine couple and carved architectural members including foliage patterns, amalaka, kapotpali, doorjamb with semi-circular shrine pilaster, broken octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having pranjala (water chute) in the north, 50 pillar bases in association of the huge structure, are indicative of remains which are distinctive features found associated with the temples of north India."

The rulers of the Sultanate of Delhi and its successor Mugal Empire were great patrons of art and architecture and constructed many fine tombs, mosques and madrasas. These have a distinctive style which bears influences of 'later Tughlaq' architecture. Mosques all over India were built in different styles; the most elegant styles developed in areas where indigenous art traditions were strong and local artisans were highly skilled. Thus regional or provincial styles of mosques grew out of local temple or domestic styles, which were conditioned in their turn by climate, terrain, materials, hence the enormous difference between the mosques of Bengal, Kashmir and Gujarat. The Babri Mosque followed the architectural school of Jaunpur.

Babri is a mosque of a distinct style, preserved mainly in architecture, developed after the Delhi Sultanate was established (1192). The square CharMinar of Hyderabad (1591) with large arches, arcades, and minarets is typical. This art made extensive use of stone and reflected Indian adaptation to Muslim rule, until Mughals art replaced it in the 17th century, as typified by structures like the Taj Mahal.

The traditional hypostyle plan with an enclosed courtyard, imported from Western Asia was generally associated with the introduction of Islam in new areas, but was abandoned in favour of schemes more suited to local climate and needs. The Babri Masjid was a mixture of the local influence and the Western Asian style and examples of this type of mosque are common in India.

The Babri Mosque was a large imposing structure with three domes, one central and two secondary. It is surrounded by two high walls, running parallel to each other and enclosing a large central courtyard with a deep well, which was known for its cold and sweet water. On the high entrance of the domed structure are fixed two stone tablets which bear two inscriptions in Persian declaring that this structure was built by Mir Baqi on the orders of Babur. The walls of the Babri Mosque are made of coarse-grained whitish sandstone blocks, rectangular in shape, while the domes are made of thin and small burnt bricks. Both these structural ingredients are plastered with thick chunam paste mixed with coarse sand.

The Central Courtyard was surrounded by lavishly curved columns superimposed to increase the height of the ceilings. The plan and the architecture followed the Begumpur Friday mosque of Jahanpanah rather than the Moghul style where Hindu masons used their own trabeated structural and decorative traditions. The excellence of their craftsmanship is noticeable in their vegetal scrolls and lotus patterns. These motifs are also present in the Firuz Shah Mosque in Firuzabad (c.1354) now in a ruined state, Qila Kuhna Mosque (c.1540, The Darasbari Mosque in the Southern suburb of the walled city of Gaur, and the Jamali Kamili Mosque built by Sher Shah Suri this was the forerunner of the Indo Islamic style adopted by Akbar.

The Babri Masjid, with its bold and graceful style, was universally praised and widely followed.^{[citation needed]}

"A whisper from the Babri Masjid Mihrab could be heard clearly at the other end 200 feet [60 m] away and through the length and breadth of the central court" according to Graham Pickford architect to Lord William Bentinck (1828–1833). The Mosque's acoustics were mentioned by him in his book 'Historic Structures of Oudhe' he says “for a 16th century building the deployment and projection of voice from the pulpit is considerably advanced, the unique deployment of sound in this structure will astonish the visitor”.

Modern architects have attributed this intriguing acoustic feature to a large recess in the wall of the Mihrab and several recesses in the surrounding walls which functioned as resonators; this design helped everyone to hear the speaker at the Mihrab. The sandstone used in building the Babri Mosque also had resonant qualities which contributed to the unique acoustics.

The Babri mosque’s Tughluquid style integrated other indigenous design components and techniques, such as air cooling systems disguised as Islamic architectural elements like arches, vaults and domes. In the Babri Masjid the high ceiling, domes, and six large grille windows (see picture) all served as a passive environmental control system that allowed in natural ventilation as well as daylight, helping keep the interior cool.

The reported medicinal properties of the deep well in the central courtyard have been featured in various news reports such as the BBC report of December 1989 and in various newspapers. The earliest mention of the Babri water well was in a two line reference to the Mosque in the Gazette of Faizabad District 1918 which says “There are no significant historical buildings here, except for various Buddhist shrines, the Babri Mosque is an ancient structure with a well which both the Hindus and Mussalmans claim has Miraculous properties.”

Ayodhya, a pilgrimage site for Hindus has an annual fair attended by over 500,000 people of both faiths, many devotees came during the annual Ram festival to drink from the water well in the Babri Courtyard. It was believed drinking water from this well could cure a range of illnesses. Hindu pilgrims also believed that the Babri water well was the original well in the Ram Temple under the mosque. Ayodhya Muslims believed that the well was a gift from God. Local women regularly brought their new born babies to drink from the reputedly curative water.

The 125 foot (40 m) deep well in question was situated in the South Eastern Courtyard of the large rectangular courtyard of the Babri Mosque. There was a small Hindu shrine built in 1890 joining the well with a statute of Lord Rama. It was an artesian well and drew water from a considerable distance below the water table. Eleven feet (3 m) in radius the first 30 feet (10 m) from ground level were bricked. It drew water from a reservoir trapped in a bed of shale sand and gravel; this could explain the unusually cool temperature of the water. The water contained almost no sodium explaining its reputation that the water was ‘sweet.’ To access the well one had to climb on to a three foot (1 m) platform, the well was covered with planks of thick wood with an unhinged trapdoor. Water was drawn by means of a bucket and long lengths of rope and due to its claimed ‘spiritual properties’ used only for drinking.

Even though the medicinal properties of artesian wells can be explained by the high amount of calcium and mineral content in the water it, is significant that Hindus and Muslims in Ayodhya considered the Babri Mosque Complex a haven of peace and spiritual tranquillity. Many people in the area, of both faiths, had a profound belief in the miraculous properties of its cold and pure underground water. Folklore is said to contribute much to the legends of the healing waters.

According to Hindu historians^[who?], the Muslim emperor Babur came down from Ferghana in 1527 and overcame the Hindu King of Chittodgad, Rana Sangrama Singh at Sikri, using cannons and artillery. After this victory, Babar dominated the subjugated Hindu population. His general, Mir Baqi, was in charge of the region.

Mir Baqi allegedly destroyed this temple at Ayodhya, built by the Hindus to commemorate Rama. Mir Baqi built a mosque at the site of the destroyed temple. This was called the Babri Masjid Mosque, named after King Babar. The claim of the destruction of this temple and the erection of a mosque in its place is also mentioned in the Encyclopedia Britannica.^[10]

The most clinching Palaeographic evidence emerged from the inscription on the thick stone slab that the debris of the demolished structure yielded on 6th December, 1992. Over 265 pieces of artifacts were recovered that day. All of them have been identified as being part of the ancient temple. The inscription has 20 lines, 30 shlokas (verses), and is composed in chaste Sanskrit written in Nagari script. The ‘Nagari Lipi’ (a form of Sanskrit script) was prevalent in the eleventh and twelfth century. The crucial part of its message as deciphered by a team of experts {world class Epigraphists and Sanskrit scholars, Historians and Archaeologists} which includes Prof. A.M. Shastri, Dr. K.V. Ramesh, Dr. T.P. Verma, Prof. B.R. Grover, Dr. A.K. Sinha, Dr. Sudha Malaiya, Dr. D.P. Dubey and Dr. G.C. Tripathi. It is reproduced below in English.

The first twenty verses are the praises of the king Govind Chandra Gharhwal (AD 1114 to 1154) and his dynasty while the twenty-first verse says the followings: "For the salvation of his soul the King( Govind Chandra Gharhwal) after paying his obeisance at the little feet of Vamana Avatar (the incarnation of God as a midget Brahmana) went about constructing a wondrous temple for Vishnu Hari (Shri Rama) with marvelous pillars and structure of stone reaching the skies and culminating in a superb top with a massive sphere of gold and projecting shafts in the sky - a temple so grand that no other King in the History of the nation had ever built before."

It further states that this astounding temple (ati-adbhutam) was built in the temple-city of Ayodhya. Line 19 describes god Vishnu (Shri Rama) as destroying king Bali (brother of Sugreeva) and the ten-headed Dashanana (Ravana). It is to be noted that King Govind Chandra Gharhwal reconstructed this temple after Salar Massood had destroyed it when he had invaded Ayodhya earlier.

In yet another reference, the Faizabad District Judge on a plaint filed by Mahant Raghubar Das gave a judgment on 18th March, 1886. Though the plaint was dismissed, yet the judgment brought out two points very clearly in the following words:

"I found that Masjid built by Emperor Babar stands on the border of the town of Ayodhya…. It is most unfortunate that Masjid should have been built on land specially held sacred by the Hindus, but as that event occurred 358 years ago it is too late now to remedy the grievance. All that can be done is to maintain the parties in status quo. In such a case as the present one any innovation would cause more harm and derangement of order than benefit."

Hindus consider this judgement as an evidence of Ram Temple.

According to Jain Samata Vahini, a social organization of the Jains, "the only structure that could be found during excavation would be a sixth century Jain temple".

Sohan Mehta, the General Secretary of Jain Samata Vahini, claims that the demolished disputed structure was actually built on the remnants of an ancient Jain temple, and that the excavation by ASI, ordered by Allahabad High Court to settle the Babri Masjid-Ramjanmabhoomi dispute, would prove it.

Ayodhya was the place where five Jain teerthankars, Rishabhdeo, Ajeeth Nath, Abhinandanji, Sumati Nath and Anant Nath, stayed. The ancient city was among the five biggest centres of Jainism and Buddhism till 450 years ago, Mehta asserted quoting writings of 18th century Jain monks.^[11] Jain body jumps into Ayodhya dispute, claims disputed site-Press Trust of India^[11]

Muslims sources say that neither history nor fact can come to prove the Hindu case as claimed above.^{[citation needed]} They claim that is clear that the allegations, on which, the demands of RSS, Vishwa Hindu Parishad and Hindu Munnani are based for laying claim to Babri Masjid are biased against Islam.

The first recorded incident of violence over the issue between Hindus and Muslims took place in 1853 during the reign of Nawab Wajid Ali Shah of Awadh.

According to the District Gazetteer Faizabad 1905, it is said that "up to this time (1855), both the Hindus and Muslims used to worship in the same building. But since the Mutiny (1857), an outer enclosure has been put up in front of the Masjid and the Hindus forbidden access to the inner yard, make the offerings on a platform (chabootra), which they have raised in the outer one."

Some Hindus^[who?] in 1883 wanted to construct a temple on this chabootra, but the Deputy Commissioner prohibited it on January 19, 1885. Raghubir Das, a mahant, filed a suit before the Faizabad Sub-Judge. Pandit Harikishan was seeking permission to construct a temple on this chabootra measuring 17 ft. x 21 ft., the suit was dismissed. An appeal was filed before the Faizabad District Judge, Colonel J.E.A. Chambiar who, after an inspection of spot on March 17, 1886, dismissed the appeal. A Second Appeal was filed on May 25, 1886, before the Judicial Commissioner of Awadh, W. Young, who also dismissed the appeal. With this, the first round of legal battle fought by the Hindus came to an end.

During the "communal riots" of 1934, walls around the Masjid and one of the domes of the Masjid were damaged. These were reconstructed by the British Government.

On mid-night of December 22, 1949, when the police guards were asleep, idols of Rama and Sita were quietly brought into the Masjid and were planted. This was reported by constable, Mata Prasad, the next morning and recorded at the Ayodhya police station. The following morning (December 23, 1949), a large Hindu crowd made a "frantic attempt" to enter the Masjid on in order to offer puja to the deities. The District Magistrate K.K. Nair has recorded that "The crowd made a most determined attempt to force entry. The lock was broken and policemen were rushed off their feet. All of us, officers and men, somehow pushed the crowd back and held the gate. The sadhus recklessly hurled themselves against men and arms and it was with great difficulty that we managed to hold the gate. The gate was secured and locked with a powerful lock brought from outside and police force was strengthened (5:00 pm)."

On hearing this news Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru directed UP Chief Minister Govind Ballabh Pant, to see that the deities were removed. Under Pant's orders, Chief Secretary Bhagwan Sahay and Inspector-General of Police V.N. Lahiri sent immediate instructions to Faizabad to remove the deities. However, K.K. Nair feared that the Hindus would retaliate and pleaded inability to carry out the orders.

Following so many efforts to liberate the Ramjanmabhoomi on the part of Hindus, a suit was filed before Faizabad's civil judge on January 16, 1950, by one Gopal Singh Visharad, asking unrestricted darshan. The senior saint and former Ramjanmabhoomi Trust chairman, the late Mahant Ramchandra Paramhans also filed a similar suit.

In 1984, the ,VHP launched a massive movement for opening the locks of the temple, following which the Faizabad session judge on February 1, 1986, allowed Hindus to worship at the site and the locks were re-opened.

In 1988-89, nearly two lakh Ramshilas were worshiped all over the country by Hindus. On November 9, 1989, the then Prime Minister, Rajiv Gandhi allowed shilannyas at an undisputed site.

It is generally thought that the Mosque was built by Babur because an inscription on the mosque records his name. Although there is a detailed account of the life of Babur in the form of his diary (Babur Nama), the pages of the relevant period are missing in the diary. The contemporary Tarikh-i-Babari records that Babar's troops "demolished many Hindu temples at Chanderi"^{[citation needed]}.

In 2003, The Archaeology Society of India conducted a study and an excavation to ascertain the type of structure that was beneath the rubble.^[12] The summary of the ASI report ^[13] indicated definite proof of a temple under the mosque. In the words of ASI researchers, they discovered "distinctive features associated with... temples of north India". The excavations yielded:

stone and decorated bricks as well as mutilated sculpture of a divine couple and carved architectural features, including foliage patterns, amalaka, kapotapali, doorjamb with semi-circular shrine pilaster, broke octagonal shaft of black schist pillar, lotus motif, circular shrine having pranjala (watershute) in the north and 50 pillar bases in association with a huge structure" ^[14]

The Muslims strongly criticized the report, claiming that it pandered to certain interests and made no remarks on evidence in support of Muslims such as bones unearthed with tool markings on them.^[15]. This view was shared by many Muslim religious groups including the Sunni Waqf Board and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board.

Examining the ASI's conclusion of a mandir under the structure, the VHP and the RSS stepped up demands for Muslims to restore the three holiest North Indian mandirs to Hindus.^[14]

The Ayodhya debate is a political, historical and socio-religious debate that was prevalent especially in the 1990s in South Asia.

The date of the construction of the Babri Mosque is disputed. Before the 1940s, the Mosque was called Masjid-i Janmasthan. Although there exists a detailed account of the life of Babur in the form of his diary, the pages of the relevant period are missing. The construction of the mosque subsequent to the demolition of the temple is speculated to have occurred anywhere between 1194 and 1528 (with the Ghorid conquests having reached Ayodhya in 1194).

On 6 December 1992 the mosque was destroyed by Hindu nationalists,^[1] 150,000 strong, during a planned ceremony, despite a commitment to the Indian Supreme Court that the mosque would not be harmed.^[2][3]

On 16 December 1992, the Liberhan Commission was set up by the Government of India to probe the circumstances that led to the demolition of the Babri Masjid. It has been the longest running commission in India's history with 48 extensions granted by various governments. The commission submitted its report to Prime Minister Manmohan Singh on 30 June 2009, more than 16 years after the incident.^[16]

Contents of the report were leaked to the news media in November 2009. The report blamed then high-ranking members of the Indian government and Hindu nationalists for the destruction of the Mosque. Its contents caused uproar in the Indian parliament.

Kalyan Singh, who was the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh during the mosque’s demolition, has come for the harshest criticism in the report. He is accused of posting bureaucrats and police officers who would stay silent during the mosque’s demolition in Ayodhya.

Indicting the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) government in Uttar Pradesh then, the one-man commission said in its report: "Kalyan Singh's government was the essential component needed by the Sangh Parivar for its purposes. Kalyan Singh lived up the expectations of the Parivar".

The commission’s report says Singh and his Cabinet allowed the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to directly run his government.The statement government had "systematically and in a pre-planned manner removed inconvenient bureaucrats from positions of power, dismantled and diluted the security apparatus and infrastructure, lied consistently to the high court and the Supreme Court of India and to the people of India to evade constitutional governance and thus betrayed the confidence of the electorate".

"The chief minister and his cabinet were the proverbial insiders who caused the collapse of the entire system."

Singh allegedly maintained a "studied silence" even at the height of the crisis in December 1992 and "refused to allow even a single measure which might impede the Ayodhya campaign or prevent the assault on the disputed structures, the journalists or the innocent people".

He allegedly did not direct the police "to use force or resort to firing to chase away the miscreants or to save the lives of those wretched innocents..." though he was alerted that the Babri Masjid had been demolished and rioters were attacking Muslims in Ayodhya.

"The wanton violence against human life and property continued unabated and even at that late stage, the chief minister did not use the central forces which could have been swiftly deployed," the report states.

Uma Bharti, Govindacharya, Kalyan Singh and Shanker Singh Vaghela--all of whom were with the BJP then--are held primarily responsible for the destruction of the mosque and the report says that they could have prevented the assault.

Senior BJP leaders Atal Behari Vajpayee, Lal Krishna Advani and Murli Manohar Joshi are called “pseudo-moderates”. The report holds them intellectually and ideologically responsible for the mosque’s destruction. The report says that they gave false assurances to court, people and the nation.

Vajpayee, Prime Minister in the BJP-led National Democratic Government, was not present on December 6 when the mosque was brought down, but the report says it cannot be assumed that Vajpayee, Advani and didn't know of the designs of the Sangh Parivar

Justice Liberhan has almost given a clean chit to the 1992 Central government and then Prime Minister P V Narasimha Rao.

More than 2000 people were killed in the ensuing riots following the demolition. Riots broke out in many major Indian cities including Mumbai, and Delhi.^[17]

In fiction, the Lajja, a highly controversial 1993 novel in Bengali by Taslima Nasrin, a writer of Bangladesh is based in the days after the demolition during which the secular structure was shaken. After its release, the author received death threats in her home country and has been living in exile ever since.

Subsequently, the events that transpired in aftermath of the demolition and the riots are an important part of the plot of the films like Bombay (1995) and Naseem (1995), and also mentioned in Slumdog Millionaire (2008).

• Ram Janmabhoomi
• Conversion of non-Muslim places of worship into mosques
• All India Babri Masjid Action Committee
• Indian secularism
• In fiction: Lajja, Bombay
• Bombay Riots

• Ram Sharan Sharma. Communal History and Rama's Ayodhya, People's Publishing House (PPH), 2nd Revised Edition, September, 1999, Delhi. Translated into Bengali, Hindi, Kannada, Tamil, Telugu and Urdu. Two versions in Bengali.
• Puniyani, Ram. Communal Politics: Myths Versus Facts. Sage Publications Inc, 2003
• Bacchetta, Paola. "Sacred Space in Conflict in India: The Babri Masjid Affair." Growth & Change. Spring2000, Vol. 31, Issue 2.
• Baburnama: Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor. 1996. Edited, translated and annotated by Wheeler M. Thacktson. New York and London: Oxford University Press.
• Ayodhya and the Future of India. 1993. Edited by Jitendra Bajaj. Madras: Centre for Policy Studies. ISBN 81-86041-02-8 hb ISBN 81-86041-03-6 pb
• Elst, Koenraad. 1991. Ayodhya and After: Issues Before Hindu Society. 1991. New Delhi: Voice of India. [1]
• Emmanuel, Dominic. 'The Mumbai bomb blasts and the Ayodhya tangle', National Catholic Reporter (Kansas City, August 27 2003).
• Sita Ram Goel: Hindu Temples - What Happened to Them, Voice of India, Delhi 1991. [2] [3]
• Harsh Narain. 1993. The Ayodhya Temple Mosque Dispute: Focus on Muslim Sources. Delhi: Penman Publishers.
• Romey, Kristin M., "Flashpoint Ayodhya." Archaeology Jul/Aug2004, Vol. 57, Issue 4.
• Romila Thapar. 'A Historical Perspective on the Story of Rama' in Thapar (2000).
• Ayodhya ka Itihas evam Puratattva — Rigveda kal se ab tak (‘History and Archaeology of Ayodhya — From the Time of the Rigveda to the Present’) by Thakur Prasad Varma and Swarajya Prakash Gupta. Bharatiya Itihasa evam Samskrit Parishad and DK Printworld. New Delhi.
• Ayodhya 6 December 1992 (ISBN 0-670-05858-0) by P. V. Narasimha Rao

• Advani charged with Ayodhya riots - BBC News
• Mumbai riots of 1992-93: Letting sleeping dogs lie
• Holy work destroys peace in India - Time Magazine
• The wrath of Rama - Time Magazine
• 'Timeline: Ayodhya crisis', BBC News (October 17 2003). Retrieved June 21 2005
• 'Q&A: The Ayodhya dispute', BBC News (November 15 2004). Retrieved June 21 2005

Research Papers

• Ayodhya and Politics of Indian Secularism
• Political Implications of Babri Masjid Demolition

26°47′44″N 82°11′40″E / 26.7956°N 82.1945°E / 26.7956; 82.1945