Twitter
Advertisement

Ayodhya Dispute: Janmasthan cannot file suit - Muslim parties

Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan told a five-judge bench that a place being made a juridical person cannot be accepted in law for a juridical person entails certain rights and duties.

Latest News
article-main
File photo of Babri Masjid
FacebookTwitterWhatsappLinkedin

Ayodhya may be the birthplace of Lord Ram but that cannot convert Shri Ram Janmasthan as a juridical person capable of filing a suit, argued the Muslim side in the Ayodhya title suit hearing in the Supreme Court on Friday.

Opposing the concept of Janmsthan joining as one of the plaintiffs who filed the suit in 1989 along with the deity itself – Bhagwan Ram lalla Virajman (infant Lord Ram), the lead counsel for the Muslims, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan told a five-judge bench that a place being made a juridical person cannot be accepted in law for a juridical person entails certain rights and duties. Just because a place is holy, the sacred character of that place cannot attach it any rights and duties and hence a juridical person, Dhavan said.

Arguing against the submissions already advanced on behalf of deity of Lord Ram, Dhavan submitted that it was argued that since time immemorial this place was regarded as the birthplace. But it was first introduced as a deity in itself in 1989 when the suit came to be filed. Dhavan further stated that prior to this date, the Hindu side never asserted the Janmsthan as a deity or juridical person as it was throughout since 1885 represented through the shebait or next friend of the deity.

The argument provoked several questions from the bench of Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justices SA Bobde, DY Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer. The bench said, "While recognizing the juridical status of a deity or an idol, there is a duty to protect the endowment to that deity and to protect the right of worshippers. So the reason why our law recognizes a deity is not associated with the importance of the deity but realising the important of its endowment and interest of worshippers."

Another judge on the bench told Dhavan that the Hindu side has argued that anything that self exists without form can be deity. "If Janmsthan is to be treated as a juridical person, we have to first identify what are those features that render any idol as a juridical person," said the bench. Dhavan supplemented his argument by saying that if Janmsthan is to be a juridical person, the Hindu side must show that this place manifested itself in a form and proof that it was accepted as such. "Any object that is sacred does not become a juridical person. For instance sun, it cannot have any rights inherent in it," Dhavan submitted.

The bench asked Dhavan if the Kaba of Muslims was also divine as it self-exists. Dhavan said it is intrinsically divine. The status accorded by worshippers cannot determine sanctity of an object as then every hill shaped in the form of an elephant will be treated as manifestation of Lord Ganesha, he added. The arguments will continue on Monday.

KEY HIGHLIGHTS

 Lead counsel for the Muslims, senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan told a five-judge bench a place being made a juridical person cannot be accepted in law for a juridical person entails certain rights and duties
 Bench asked Dhavan if the Kaba of Muslims was also divine as it self-exists.

 

Find your daily dose of news & explainers in your WhatsApp. Stay updated, Stay informed-  Follow DNA on WhatsApp.
Advertisement

Live tv

Advertisement
Advertisement