Ayodhya: SC closes contempt case against 88-yrs-old man for cursing Sr advocate for Muslim parties

The Supreme Court on Thursday closed a contempt case against an 88-year-old retired public servant for writing letters cursing senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan for appearing for Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case.

A five-judge Constitution bench, headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, said the man had expressed regret for using such objectionable words in his communication to Dhavan.

"Why are you saying all these things. You are an 88-year-old man. You don't have respect for the law," the bench, also comprising justices S A Bobde, D Y Chandrachud, Ashok Bhushan and S Abdul Nazeer, told advocate M Velmurugan, appearing for the octogenarian.

Velmurugan said that the man expresses regret for writing such letters to Dhavan.

The bench, while accepting the apologies said that there should not be a repetition of such acts and ordered closure of the contempt case.

Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Dhavan, said he does want any punishment for the retired public servant but a message should be sent across to all in the country that there should not be any intimidation of any counsel appearing for any party in the case.

The court had on September 3 issued notice to N Shanmugam, retired education officer, on Dhavan's contempt plea for cursing him in a letter, saying physical disabilities will befall him for taking up the case on behalf of Muslim parties against the deity 'Ram Lalla'.

Dhavan, who is appearing for lead petitioner M Siddiq and the All India Sunni Waqf Board in ongoing hearing in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case, had said that he received a letter on August 14, 2019 from Shanmugam.

He had alleged that he has been accosted both at home and in court premises.

The plea had said that by sending the letter the alleged contemnor has committed criminal contempt because "he is intimidating a senior advocate who is appearing for a party/parties before the apex court and discharging his duties as a senior advocate and he ought not to have sent such a letter".

"Exercise suo motu powers under Article 129 of the Constitution of India and Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act taking cognisance of the criminal contempt on the basis of facts placed on record against contemnor/opposite party for committing criminal contempt," it said.