New Delhi -°C
Today in New Delhi, India

Sep 22, 2019-Sunday
-°C

Humidity
-

Wind
-

Select city

Metro cities - Delhi, Mumbai, Chennai, Kolkata

Other cities - Noida, Gurgaon, Bengaluru, Hyderabad, Bhopal , Chandigarh , Dehradun, Indore, Jaipur, Lucknow, Patna, Ranchi

Sunday, Sep 22, 2019

Ayodhya case: Muslim parties’ lawyer says still receiving threats

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan complained to the Supreme Court that a member of his legal team had been receiving threat messages for appearing in the matter.

india Updated: Sep 13, 2019 01:20 IST
HT Correspondent
HT Correspondent
New Delhi
The constitution bench is hearing cross-appeals against the 2010 Allahabad high court  verdict
The constitution bench is hearing cross-appeals against the 2010 Allahabad high court verdict(HT FILE)
         

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, who is representing the Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute case, on Thursday complained to the Supreme Court that a member of his legal team had been receiving threat messages for appearing in the matter.

“Last week, I received a message on my Facebook wall. I received threats. Yesterday, my clerk was told that his boss was arguing against the Hindu deity,” he told the Supreme Court bench hearing the case.

Then he referred to the purported statement of Uttar Pradesh minister Mukut Bihari Verma made in 2018 and said, “He had said that ‘’jagah hamari hai. Mandir hamara hai aur Supreme Court bhi hamari hai [the place is ours, so are the temple and the Supreme Court].”

“I cannot go on filing contempt petitions,” Dhavan said, adding that there was “camaraderie” in the court, but the situation outside was not conducive and “one word from My lords” would serve the purpose.

Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi took a strong exception to such a “behaviour”. “We will put it on record that such behaviour is to be deprecated. This is something that should not be happening. We are in the midst of arguments. Counsel for both sides must be free to make their submissions free from all influences, however subtle they might be. We strongly condemn it,” CJI Gogoi said.

Dhavan said he was “not arguing against the Hindu faith” and “people forgot that I had argued Kashi and Kamakhya cases in past”.

The constitution bench is hearing cross-appeals against the 2010 Allahabad high court verdict

Resuming his arguments, Dhavan told the bench on behalf of Wakf Board that Nirmohi Akhara would continue to have “shebait” rights or rights as a devotee, at the disputed site.

“I’m supporting the appeal of the Nirmohi Akhara. The decision denying them shebait rights is on insufficient grounds...,” he submitted.

(With PTI inputs )

First Published: Sep 13, 2019 01:20 IST