Top Stories’Frivolous’ Plea To Protect Pending Ram Temple Artefacts At Ayodhya:Supreme Court Partially Waives Cost And Closes The Matter Mehal Jain20 Nov 2020 11:30 PMShare This – xNoting that such pleas “create aspirations” and “disrupt emotions”, the Supreme Court on Friday partially waived the costs imposed on the petitioners for two ‘frivolous’ PILs seeking preservation of artefacts recovered from the Ram Janmabhoomi site at Ayodhya, with the warning that such ventures not be indulged in in the future.On July 20, the writ petitions were dismissed with costs of Rs….Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginNoting that such pleas “create aspirations” and “disrupt emotions”, the Supreme Court on Friday partially waived the costs imposed on the petitioners for two ‘frivolous’ PILs seeking preservation of artefacts recovered from the Ram Janmabhoomi site at Ayodhya, with the warning that such ventures not be indulged in in the future.On July 20, the writ petitions were dismissed with costs of Rs. One lakh on each of the petitioners, to be deposited with the Supreme Court Employees’ Mutual Welfare Fund within one month. Subsequently, it was noted that the Advocate for the petitioners, instead of depositing Rs. 4,00,000 as there are four petitioners, has filed proof of depositing the cost of Rs. 1,00,000/ only, which was deposited on 20.08.2020 barred by time by 1 day. Since, the counsel for the petitioner did not deposit the amount as directed by the Court on 20.07.2020, the matter was listed before the Court under Order 1 Rule 3 of Supreme Court Rules 2013 on 16.10.2020 when the Registry was directed to prepare a fresh office report, furnish copy thereof to the advocate on record for the petitioners and list the matter on 20th November.On Friday, the bench of Justices A. M. Khanwilkar and B. R. Gavai appreciated the affidavit where the petitioners have explained the circumstances in which an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- came to be deposited despite the order dated 20th July. Senior Advocate Meneka Guruswamy appearing for the writ petitioners urged that the petitioners come from a very humble background and have realised their mistake, that they were ill advised to pursue the proceedings.”Learned senior counsel has beseeched this Court to show indulgence and compassion to the petitioners who have already deposited the amount of Rs.1,00,000/-. We accept this request made by the petitioners on condition that they should not indulge in such misadventure in future. The delay in depositing the amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (rupees one lakh only) is condoned and that amount be treated as full and final costs paid by the petitioners in terms of order dated 20th July, 2020″, said the bench.”We are deeply and profusely sorry. There was some genuine confusion. We have explained it in the affidavit. We are tendering an unconditional apology”, pleaded Senior advocate Meneka Guruswamy, for the petitioners, at the outset.”There were two writ petitions. We thought the costs were of Rs. 1 lakh on both”, she urged.”Now that you have this clarity, when will the balance amount of Rs. 3 lakhs be deposited?”, asked Justice A. M. Khanwilkar.”That will destroy the petitioners. One is a labourer, the other is a PHD student. We have annexed the salary slips, their designation, occupation…I am appealing to the compassion of this court. They made a mistake, please forgive them!”, prayed the senior counsel.”This is not that simple. Aspirations, emotions are created by such petitions! That is the problem. An emotional issue was disrupted by this petition!…What was your challenge?”, asked Justice Khanwilkar.”We were only on the preservation of artefacts, nothing else. And that is also being done by the government now”, urged Ms. Guruswamy.Justice Khanwilkar indicated the July 20 order of the court dismissing the petitions- “What is intended by the petitions is to reopen the issue that has been given a quietus by this Court. After long drawn litigation, digging of all trenches of allotted area of site of Ram Temple is sought for. This is nothing but a sheer attempt to reopen the issue to scuttle the judgment rendered by this Court on 9.11.2019. The petitions are absolutely bereft of merits and with frivolous prayers. Shri Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General of India, has categorically stated that whatever has been found, will be preserved. However, we find that the kind of prayer made in the petitions virtually tantamounts to seeking reconsideration of the matter under the guise of grey areas, to do further digging of the entire site of various trenches which is nothing but a vain bid to get rid of the judgment of this Court and to start litigation de novo under the guise of the Act of 1958 and to preserve site and artefacts under the Act of 1958. Thus, we find the petitions to be wholly frivolous, perverse and without merit. Such petitions ought not to be filed with the ulterior purpose of starting a litigation afresh, praying for entire digging of various trenches. The petitioners intend that whatever monument at the Temple site and artefacts unearthed need preservation, is nothing but an attempt to dilute the judgment rendered by this Court.””This is the reason why the order was passed”, said Justice Khanwilkar.”I was there. Incidentally, I happened to be there when it was argued. It was argued differently, de hors the prayers. It was not argued as innocuously as the prayers”, interjected SG Tushar Mehta.”The SG is misleading the court! I didn’t get any chance to advance arguments”, argued Ms. Guruswamy.”Justice Gavai was there on that bench”, pointed out Justice Khanwilkar.”We are just praying for some compassion, that is it!”, she pressed.”There were also some newspaper reports regarding the filing of the petition?”, asked Justice B. R. Gavai.”We had annexed some newspaper reports. To my knowledge, there were no reports regarding the filing of the petitions. I don’t appear in such matters”, replied the senior counsel.”This is rather common”, commented the SG.”This is the new normal! File a petition and place it in social media immediately!”, remarked Justice Khanwilkar.”Sometimes they are filed only for this!”, added the SG.”That is astonishing and unbecoming! I don’t appear for such causes”, repeated Ms. Guruswamy.”Let’s not go into that”, commented the SG.”Take the advice of the SG or you will be digging yourself more”, said Justice Khanwilkar in good humour.”I always take his advice. I am looking for Your Lordships’ compassion and the SG’s graciousness”, said Ms. Guruswamy.”Justice Gavai wants to accept your plea for compassion. We don’t want the petitioners to suffer because of your advice”, observed the bench.”I am deeply obliged”, said the senior advocate.”Perhaps you should fund the costs!”, said Justice Khanwilkar in a lighter vein.”I am entirely unfunded myself!”, replied Ms. Guruswamy.”Yes, they should pay. The petitioners could be merely name-lenders”, remarked the SG.The bench inquired from the SG as to his view. “Once Justice Gavai has spoken, I bow down. But Your Lordships may consider imposing a token cost. A message should go! The highest court of the country can’t be treated like this”, said the SG.”Yes…somebody is coming from here, somebody from there”, noted Justice Gavai.”That has already been done. A cost of Rs. 1 lakh has already been paid”, said Ms. Guruswamy.”We have shown our indulgence, but no such ventures be undertaken in the future”, ordered the bench.”I am deeply grateful”, said Ms. Guruswamy.”You should be grateful to the SG. He was kind enough to not oppose”, said Justice Khanwilkar.”I am always grateful to him. Always looking to learn from him”, said Ms. Guruswamy.A bench of Justices Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai and Krishan Murari had on July 20 dismissed the petitions and said that a five-judge bench has already given its verdict and this is an attempt through PIL to overreach the judgment. The bench said that a cost of Rs 1 lakh each is imposed on both the petitioners which should be paid within one month. Subsequently, it was clarified that since there were 4 petitioners, the quantum of the costs was Rs. 4 lakhsClick Here To Download Order[Read Order]Next Story
Brussels: Netherlands captain Virgil van Dijk will miss Tuesday’s Euro 2020 qualifier against Estonia for personal reasons, the Dutch federation announced on Sunday.”The manager Ronald Koeman will not be able to call up Virgil van Dijk on Tuesday against Estonia”, the federation said on its website. “The Dutch captain has had to withdraw from the match for personal reasons and left the training camp immediately.”The Dutch booked their passage to next year’s finals, their first major competition since the 2014 World Cup, with a goalless draw against Northern Ireland in Belfast on Saturday.At stake in Tuesday’s game will be top spot in Group C which is currently held by Germany who are two points ahead of the Dutch.The defender is clear to play for Liverpool against Crystal Palace in the English Premier League at the weekend. EstoniaEuro 2020 Qualifiersfootballnetherlands First Published: November 17, 2019, 8:39 PM IST Get the best of News18 delivered to your inbox – subscribe to News18 Daybreak. Follow News18.com on Twitter, Instagram, Facebook, Telegram, TikTok and on YouTube, and stay in the know with what’s happening in the world around you – in real time.
India captain Virat Kohli smashed a career-best 243 on his home ground but it was Delhi’s notorious smog which dominated discussion after Sunday’s play in the third and final Test against Sri Lanka.The majority of the Sri Lankan players returned from the second day’s lunch break wearing facemasks as the seasonal haze affecting the region thickened over the Feroz Shah Kotla Stadium.The second session witnessed two stoppages, of 17 and five minutes, as Lahiru Gamage and his pace colleague Suranga Lakmal both left the field finding it difficult to breathe.”It’s well documented that Delhi has high level of pollution,” Sri Lanka coach Nic Pothas said afterwards, calling it a “unique case”.”We had players coming off the field and vomiting,” he told reporters after the match. “There were oxygen cylinders in the change room. It’s not normal for players to suffer in that way while playing the game.”Umpires Nigel Llong and Joel Wilson were discussing the air quality with the tourists when Kohli declared India’s innings on 536/7.Sri Lanka, trailing 0-1 in the series, batted for 44.3 overs to reach 131/3 at stumps.Pothas said a couple of his players vomited in the dressing room but denied the tourists at any stage pressed for stopping the game.”We are here to play cricket…there was not a case of us wanting to stop. We just wanted to have some clarity on the safety of the players,” the South African said.”When it became unsafe, I think that’s where the conversation started because the safety of the players is of paramount importance.”advertisementDelhi’s government last month ordered schools temporarily shut after pollution readings in some places peaked at 500, the most severe level on the government’s air quality index that measures poisonous particles.India’s bowling coach Bharat Arun, however, played down the issue.”Virat batted close to two days, he didn’t need a mask,” he said, referring to the India captain’s second successive double hundred in the series.”We are focused on what we need to do. The conditions are the same for both, we aren’t too bothered about it.”India head coach Ravi Shastri also entered the ground for a chat with the umpires.”Ravi was pretty simple. He said ‘please get on with the game, you don’t need to stop’,” Arun said.”I think the umpires and the match referee have a job on hand and it’s not up to the players to go and protest. They know what they are doing.”When the play was unnecessarily being stopped, we just wanted to get on with the game because our focus is to win the Test match.”Arun was less than sympathetic to the Sri Lankans, saying it was “their problem to keep their bowlers fit” and denied India were forced to declare their innings.