Ayodhya case: Muslim party's advocate alleges his clerk was assaultedLast updated on Sep 12, 2019, 06:53 pm
Senior lawyer Rajeev Dhavan, who is appearing for the Sunni Waqf Board in the sensitive Ayodhya case, on Thursday alleged that his clerk was assaulted on the Supreme Court's premises.
During the hearing of the title dispute, Dhavan said, "This is not the right atmosphere conducive for hearing."
He mentioned, "one word from your Lordship" should be enough to stop such incidents.
Dhavan said he has also received threats
While talking about his clerk, Dhavan pointed out to the apex court that he had received threatening messages in the past.
He claimed people messaged him asking whether he was "in favor or against Lord Rama".
The advocate also mentioned that he has filed a contempt petition against an elderly person and he cannot keep filing such pleas regularly.
Subsequently, Supreme Court offered security to Dhavan
After hearing Dhavan's side, the five-judge bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and SA Nazeer took note of submission and condemned the incident.
The court also offered protection to Dhavan, which the advocate refused stating that assurance was enough.
Earlier, on September 3, the apex court had issued a notice to two individuals for allegedly threatening Dhavan.
Here's what the Supreme Court said on the matter
"This is something that should not be happening. We are in the midst of an argument. Counsel for both sides must be free to make their submissions free from all influences, however subtle they might be," the bench said.
Interestingly, the Ayodhya verdict could come out in November
Meanwhile, it is likely that the five-judge bench led by CJI Gogoi could pronounce its verdict in the decades-old case in November.
The Hindu side, including deity Ram Lalla and Nirmohi Akhada, has concluded its arguments, and the bench is now listening to the Muslim side.
To recall, the 2.77 acres of disputed land was divided equally by Allahabad High Court in 2010.
Earlier, high-profile mediation panel failed to reach a solution
None of the parties were satisfied with the verdict and knocked on SC's doors. As many as 14 pleas were filed in SC related to the case.
Earlier this year, with an intent of giving "healing a chance", SC referred the case for mediation.
But the panel, headed by former SC judge FMI Kalifulla, failed to bring warring parties on one page.