The mosque was named Babri Masjid and was in Ayodhya, India. It was built in 1528–29 and destroyed in 1992 by Hindu nationalists, claiming it was the birthplace of Rama, a major deity of Hinduism. According to Hindu nationalists, there once was a fort there known as Ramkot which was allegedly destroyed during the construction of the Mosque. Subsequently, there was a short excavation on that site, only lasting 15 days. Quoting Wikipedia:

"The report of the excavation concluded that there were the ruins of "a massive structure" beneath the ruins of the mosque which was "indicative of remains which are distinctive features found associated with the temples of north India", but found no evidence that the structure was specifically demolished for the construction of the Babri Masjid. The report received both praise and criticism, with some other archaeologists contesting the results of the report."

There was another excavation later in 2003, by Archaeological Survey of India. The report indicated what appears to be the presence of a 10th-century shrine under the mosque. Again, quoting Wikipedia:

"a short-lived structure of nearly 50 metres with north–south orientation was constructed. On the remains of this structure, another massive structure was constructed: this structure had at least three structural phases and three successive floors attached with it. The report concluded that it was over this construction that the disputed structure was constructed during the early 16th century"

Then it also goes on to say

"Muslim groups immediately disputed the ASI findings. The Safdar Hashmi Memorial Trust (Sahmat) criticised the report saying that it said that "presence of animal bones throughout as well as of the use of 'surkhi' and lime mortar" that was found by ASI are all characteristic of Muslim presence "that rule out the possibility of a Hindu temple having been there beneath the mosque." The report claimed otherwise on the basis of 'pillar bases' was contested since no pillars were found, and the alleged existence of 'pillar bases' has been debated by archaeologists. Syed Rabe Hasan Nadvi, chairman of the All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) alleged that ASI failed to mention any evidence of a temple in its interim reports and only revealed it in the final report which was submitted during a time of national tension, making the report highly suspect."

So yeah, it's complicated. But the thing is, the evidence of a temple isn't entirely conclusive. And the "birthplace of Rama" is not even probable, as deities as far as we no do not exist irl. Anyway, even if there was a temple there, there's no evidence that it was destroyed during the construction of the mosque. But whatever, because in 2010, Allahabad High Court originally gave one third of the land to Muslims to rebuilt the mosque, one third for constructing a temple and one third to a Hindu denomination which wanted to construct a temple very close to the site long before the destruction of the mosque but was denied by the court because it could potentially "threat" to public order. That was a really good solution in my opinion. All party were given something. There were compromises for both parties, but also their share.

But then came Modi and Supreme Court decided fuck it, the entire thing belongs to Hindus for temple construction, even though they concluded that no evidence was found that the structure was specifically demolished for the construction of the Babri Masjid.

So yeah, take it how you want to. But I take it as nationalists suppressing other groups of people. Either way, religions fucking suck and nationalism and ethnocracy sucks even more.