Muslim parties counsel tears map showing Lord Ram’s birthplace

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court witnessed high drama on the last day of hearing on the Ayodhya land dispute after senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan, representing Muslim Parties, tore up a pictorial map submitted by a Hindu party purportedly showing the birthplace of Lord Ram.

Police personnel patrol the streets in Ayodhya on Wednesday. PTI

Tribune News Service

New Delhi, October 16

The Supreme Court witnessed high drama on the last day of hearing on the Ayodhya land dispute after senior counsel Rajeev Dhavan, representing Muslim Parties, tore up a pictorial map submitted by a Hindu party purportedly showing the birthplace of Lord Ram.

The incident took place when senior advocate Vikas Singh, representing All India Hindu Mahasabha, was arguing the case. Relying on the site map and books written by foreign and Indian authors, Singh tried to prove that the central dome of the demolished structure was the birthplace of deity ‘Ram Lalla’.

Taking strong exception to Singh’s submissions, Dhavan said such documents could not be cited and relied upon now as the issue of location of ‘janmsthan’ was discussed by the Allahabad High Court on the basis of other documents.

As Singh cited a pictorial map from a book ‘Ayodhya Revisited’ written by former Bihar cadre IPS officer Kishore Kunal, Dhavan said it can’t be done. Singh relented and agreed not to press the pictorial map to be taken on record.

“What should I do with it (map)?” Dhavan asked the five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi.

As the CJI said Dhavan could tear it into pieces, the senior lawyer tore the pictorial map submitted by the All-India Hindu Mahasabha counsel, leaving lawyers and visitors surprised.

Later, Dhavan said, “The news that has become viral is that I on my own tore the papers.” Justice Nazeer – who is part of the Bench – said yes the news has become viral.

Dhavan said he had asked and sought the permission of the Bench whether those papers can be thrown and the reply from the CJI was “if it is irrelevant, you can tear it”.

“The CJI said I could shred the papers and I just followed the order. I take advice of Mr (Arvind) Datar in such matters and he told me it was a mandamus (a kind of writ or direction),” Dhavan said.

The CJI shot back saying, “Dr Dhavan is right that the Chief Justice said, so he tore up. Let this clarification also be widely reported.” The CJI was joined by another member of the Bench, Justice S A Nazeer, who said: “It is widely reported now”.