It seems that the supreme court does not want any more violence in the country. The violence due to riots in Hindu Muslim disputes. But it is sad to say that BJP leader Subramanian Swamy is influential in requesting the SC on March 21 last year for an early hearing of the Ayodhya dispute.
But, CJI J S Khehar wanted for an amicable negotiated settlement. Putting the inactive issue pending in the SC for seven years on the front burner. Justice Khekhar had even made an offer to be the mediator to bring the warring parties to the negotiation table.
On Wednesday the Supreme Court expelled BJP leader Subramanian Swamy from the case. The supreme court does not want him to be a part of the politically and communally sensitive case anymore.
The case which is responsible for Hindu Muslim disputes at Ayodhya. It is on the Hindu-Muslim ownership battle over the 2.77 acre Babri Masjid-Ram Janmabhoomi disputed plot.
32 Eminent person application also rejected
A bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra and Justices Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer also rejected intervention applications by 17 others. And also the one which is filed by 32 eminent persons.
This includes well-known filmmaker Shyam Benegal, actress Aparna Sen, columnist and writer Anil Dharker and social activist Teesta Setalvad. They have suggested that the disputed land be put to “secular use” instead of dividing it into religious lines.
But the publicity diminished just 10 days later, as on March 31 last year, the bench stated its agony at Swamy for not revealing that he was not a party to the land dispute but just an intervener. On August 11, the SC fixed December 5, 2017, for initiating the hearing.
But on that day, loud protests for early hearing were made by counsel. This suggested for listing it after July 2019. The argument was that the case should be dealt with after the next Lok Sabha elections. It came up for hearing again on February 8 and the SC fixed hearing on March 14.
Interveners had no role in the hearing of appeals.
As decided on 14 March, all parties — the Sunni Wakf Board and plaintiffs belonging to Muslim community, deity Ram Lalla through guardian Nirmohi Akhara and Uttar Pradesh government arrived at court.
They argued in harmony that this was a dispute between parties. So interveners had no role in the hearing of appeals. This also challenged the September 30, 2010, judgment of Allahabad high court.
Due to the rejection of his intervention application, Swamy powerfully argued that it was the court which had converted his petition.
Looking for protection of his fundamental right to worship Lord Ram at his birthplace in Ayodhya.
So an intervention application in the main Ayodhya land dispute case is filed. As per him, his fundamental right is much bigger than the parties’ right to land. He said, “If you are not permitting my intervention, then revive my writ petition,”.
- It is a sorry state of affair as Swamy, who was instrumental in requesting the SC on March 21 last year for an early hearing of the Ayodhya dispute.
- On March 31 last year, the bench expressed its agony at Swamy for not revealing that he was not a party to the land dispute but a mere intervener.