"It is true that my conclusions and views on certain issues are based on my knowledge existing prior to the submission of ASI’s report in court. I and Prof. Habib had given this statement that remains of old mosque or Eidgah had been found beneath the disputed site and not of any temple.If this propaganda that remains of temple were found at the disputed site, had not taken place, there would have been no occasion for me and Prof. Irfan Habib to give the above statement."

““Nobody forbade me from observing the potteries in the pottery yard but no archaeologist was there to help me in my study.”

“At the time of my exploration at the disputed site, Prof. Irfan Habib was Chairman of the said institution. It is true that we had received grant for the exploration of the disputed site through this very institution.”

““.. I did not try to know what is written in the Ramayana by Tulsi Das…”...“I did not read what features a mosque may not have. I am not a specialist in epigraphy and numismatics… I am not a geologist… I am not a student of History… I am not a specialist in architecture. My specialty was field archaeology.”

““The ASI Report had a feature not amenable to criticism. It was that they have discovered many walls and floors and some pillar bases beneath the Babri mosque, and all these constitute evidence.”

““I did not make any study of any recorded history with regard to the disputed subject.”

“Marxist Historians - Excerpts from Suraj Bhan”