"Supreme Court has reserved the order and has made it clear that the decision will come, in this case, within 23 days", said Hindu Mahasabha's lawyer Varun Sinha. "I take advice of Mr (Arvind) Datar (a senior advocate) in such matters and he told me it was a mandamus (a kind of writ or direction)", Dhavan said.
President of Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, Ram Vilas Vedanti, on Thursday, October 17, alleged that senior lawyer Rajeev Dhavan who is representing the Muslim parties in the Ayodhya dispute tore the map showing the birthplace of Lord Ram.
No sooner had Dhavan torn the maps, there was commotion, angering the judges.
Rajeev Dhavan was caught in a spat with CJI in court.
The bench is racing against time since the verdict has to be delivered before CJI Gogoi demits office on November 17.
Here's a look at how the case unfolded in the Supreme Court. - Hindu teams declare deity Rama was born and a temple existed on the web site of a medieval Mosque that was demolished by Hindu mobs in 1992, triggering non secular riots that left some 2,000 folks useless throughout India.
The ABHM said that Dhavan's act brought disrepute to the Supreme Court Bar and it is unbecoming of him when he represents a party in a civil appeal no. 10866/10 as there is expectations of a senior member of the Bar to maintain a high standard of professional ethics.
Chief Justice Gogoi is expected to announce a verdict next month.
In an analytical piece, The Wire reported why the title suit can wait and that the Supreme Court must hear it in its natural course. Dhavan shouted that he can not accuse him of indiscipline in the court.
Meanwhile, section 144 (which prohibits the assembly of more than four people) was on Monday imposed in Ayodhya till December 10, 2019, to avoid any untoward incident as the proceedings conclude in the case.
Maulana Mehboob Daryadi, general secretary of All India Ulema Council, said, "We are happy that hearing is over, we want the court to take a final call on the basis of evidence, not on the basis of religious sentiments". Justice Lalit recused himself days later.
The five-judge bench hearing the case comprises Justice S.A. Bobde, Justice D.Y. Chandrachud, Justice Ashok Bhushan and Justice S. Abdul Nazeer, apart from CJI Ranjan Gogoi.
On March 8, the apex court chose to refer the matter to a mediation committee headed by Justice (retd) F.M.I.
- Disrespected and disregarded, Carrie Lam misses another opportunity to calm the protests
- Pixel 4 XL display is rated as the "best smartphone screen"
- Trump blasts 'crazy' Nancy Pelosi and Democrats, defends Syria pullout
- Top smartphones for gaming
- Elizabeth Warren Learns That Being a Frontrunner Isn't All Fun and Games
- Defoe strengthens Euros case
- Google discontinues Daydream VR, Pixel 4 does not support it
- Talent Not an Issue for England's New Manager
- No Pixel 4 and Pixel 4 XL for India
- Kate Middleton, Prince William’s plane diverted during electrical storm in Pakistan