New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday dismissed Sunni Waqf Board and other people with tremendous condemnation that the appeals filed in the sensitive Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid title dispute will be heard after the general elections in July 2019 and will have to hear on 8th February.
A special bench, chaired by Chief Justice Dipak Misra, rejected the demand of a battery including senior advocate Kapil Sibal and Rajeev Dhavan that “appeals” would be referred to five or seven judge’s bench for sensitive nature. In this case and its effect on the country’s secular clothes and politics.
The Bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhusan and S A Nazeer asked the advocates to record against the Allahabad High Court’s 2010 decision in the land dispute with 14 civil appeals so that they sit together and ensure that all necessary documents. The Supreme Court has been registered, filed and numbered before the Registry.
In order to hear the appeal against the order of the Allahabad High Court on 8th February, in the case of any problem, they were instructed to consult the Registry. The special bench of the Supreme Court is hearing a total of 14 appeals filed in four civil lawsuits against this decision. A three-judge bench of Allahabad High Court had ruled in 2010 in a 2: 1 majority decision that the land would be divided equally among the three parties – Sunni Waqf Board, Nirmohi Akhara and Ram Lalla.
The witness hearing on Tuesday is testimony to the high drama with the lawyers representing the Waqf Board and the Babri Masjid Action Committee, who actually threatened to end the proceedings, as the bench upheld senior advocate C S Vaidyanathan asked to start his submission in the case of representation of Deity Ram Lalla Virajman.
When a bench chaired by the Chief Justice dismissed their dispute that the matter was being sent from a larger bench, which saying “No, no …”, Sibal, Sunni Waqf who appeared for the Waqf board said, “I believe That any decision in this matter will have a very serious effect and appeals should be sent to the Constitution section of five or seven judges.”No, no, no.” Please, please keep this matter in mind the consequence”
They said, “Please fix this matter in July 2019 and we assure that we will not do any adjournments … justice should not be done, it should seem to be done.” The bench contested: “What kind of submission is this? You are calling July 2019. Should not this be heard before?”
Another senior advocate Dushayant Dave raised the question of “hasty” in the appeal hearing and referred to the fact that the Ram temple issue was part of the BJP manifesto. For this, the bench replied: “You say that it should never be heard only because it had not heard in the past seven years.”
Initially, Sibal said that the approval of the cases was not completed due to the large record running at more than 19,000 pages.
To date, the Registry “gave us documents in two separate discs on September 18, 2017 and 7 November, 2017 respectively, although there are many exhibits and several pleadings which are not contained in these disks and who are still waiting “He said, he said that the High Court had relied on the 781 decision and they have to compile it.