Ayodhya Case: Supreme Court Issues Notice Over 'Curse' To Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan

New Delhi, PTI | Updated : 03 September 2019, 04:08 PM
Rajeev Dhavan has said that 'Ramayana', written by Tulsidas, was 'kavya' (poetry) and cannot said to be the part of history.
Rajeev Dhavan has said that 'Ramayana', written by Tulsidas, was 'kavya' (poetry) and cannot said to be the part of history.
HIGHLIGHTS
    • In 2010, Allahabad High Court partitioned disputed land.
    • It equally partitioned 2.77-acre among three parties.
    • Those 3 parties were Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.

The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought responses from two persons for allegedly threatening senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan for taking up the case on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board and other Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute matter. "Notice," said the five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi at the start of hearing on the 18th day in the land dispute case.

The bench has put up contempt pleas for hearing after two weeks. Dhavan had filed contempt petition against two persons, N Shanmugam, a retired education officer, and a Rajasthan resident, Sanjay Kalal Bajrangi, for allegedly threatening him for appearing for Muslim parties. Dhavan had said that 88-year-old Shanmugam had cursed him in his letter.

Dhavan, who appeared for lead petitioner M Siddiq and the All India Sunni Waqf Board, had said that he received a letter on August 14, 2019 from Shanmugam, threatening him for appearing for Muslim parties. Dhavan had said in the plea that he has also received a WhatsApp message from Bajrangi, which was also an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice before the apex court.

He had alleged that he has been accosted both at home and in the court premises. The plea said that by sending the letter the alleged contemnor has committed criminal contempt because "he is intimidating a senior advocate who is appearing for a party/parties before the apex court and discharging his duties as a senior advocate and he ought not to have sent such a letter."

"Exercise suo motu powers under Article 129 of the Constitution of India and Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act taking cognisance of the criminal contempt on the basis of facts placed on record against contemnor/opposite party for committing criminal contempt," the plea said.  

First Published: Tuesday, September 03, 2019 02:01 PM
Post Comment (+)