ALSO READPure land dispute: SC won't hear political, religious arguments on Ayodhya SC dismisses Teesta Setalvad's plea against de-freezing personal accounts Build a monument that symbolises India's unity on Babri land: Shyam Benegal Ayodhya dispute: Next hearing in Supreme Court on March 14 SC asks for English translation of documents in Ayodhya dispute case
The Supreme Court on Wednesday dashed the hopes of activists like Shyam Benegal and Teesta Setalvad to intervene in the sensitive Babri Masjid-Ram Temple land dispute case, making it clear that only the parties to the original lawsuits would be allowed to put forth their arguments. A special Bench headed by Chief Justice Dipak Misra said it would first decide whether the land dispute appeals be sent to a five-judge constitution bench as sought by lead petitioner M Siddiq (since deceased), who is represented by legal heirs in the case.
“Counsel for appellants, as well as, the respondents in all the appeals have raised objections for such intervention/filing additional documents/seeking permission to render assistance.
“We are of considered opinion that these interlocutory applications do not merit any consideration and they are accordingly rejected,” the Bench, which also comprised Justices Ashok Bhushan and S A Nazeer, said.
The Bench went a step further and directed its Registry “not to entertain any interlocutory applications for intervention or impleadment”. It, however, said that the parties can file additional papers. It accepted the vehement contention of both the parties, Hindu and Muslim organisations and individuals, that only original parties to the dispute be allowed to argue.
Besides Benegal and Setalvad, eminent persons like Aparna Sen and Anil Dharker wanted to intervene for using the disputed 2.77 acre disputed land for some ‘secular’ purposes. The intervention plea of BJP leader Subramanian Swamy, at whose instance the cases were fast-tracked by the apex court, was also rejected.