"History owes to none. Not to you Smita Ji, not to Akbar, not to me... but only to the time & fact."
And "no one can be authority except the history itself".
I stand there to respect you and respectfully put my submission too.
The background is not as plain as you pen it down. Even Baduadi whom you cite has a different opinion. Read on from ur own source.
I wonder what makes our great Historians debate upon it?
Source:Muntakhab At Tawarikh English Vol. 3
@SmitaMukerji don't respond until tweet number reads n/n. This is not 2-bit subject.
It is proven that the Brahmin has said foul words against Muhammad & such offense deserves execution as per Ulemas.
The Shaikh still required Emperor's Sanction for the execution of the Brahmin. Shaikh's words were not final.
'It implies that though Ulama still needed Akbar's decision for severe punishments like "Executions" but Akbar trusted Ulemas for it".
It really does not makes sense that Ulema's Power against Hindus bothered Akbar at all.