The Board also sought to contradict the Shia Wakf Board’s claim that it was willing to hand over the land for building a Ram temple and said that their stand in a written statement before the HC was that the land must go to Muslims whenever it is released.
Told by a lawyer that people in J&K cannot access the High Court there, CJI Gogoi called it a “serious matter” and sought a report from the HC. He said “if required, I will go personally and check... I will speak to the Chief Justice... if it’s not correct, be ready to bear the consequences”.
Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan, who is appearing for the Board, and appellant M Siddiq accepted this while discussing shebait rights claimed by Nirmohi Akhara, one of the three parties to the title suit.
This direction came after senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Chidambaram, pleaded that he should not be sent to Tihar jail. His CBI custody was ending Monday and if the trial court had sent him to judicial custody, he would have been moved to Tihar jail.
The 19 lakh people excluded from the final list can appeal with the Foreigners Tribunal within a span of 120 days with a certified copy of the rejection order from the NRC, along with the grounds for appeal.
A statement by Chidambaram’s counsel said the affidavit “seems to have been leaked with a view to sensationalise the matter and prejudice my client in the hearing scheduled before the Hon’ble Supreme Court...” and “seems to be an attempt to conduct trial by media”.
In the CBI matter, he said, Chidambaram had already been arrested and, therefore, his plea had become infructuous. Sibal objected: “My right under Article 21 cannot be frustrated. I had not been arrested when I came to the (Supreme) Court.”
Senior counsel C S Vaidyanathan, appearing for the deity, told a five-judge Constitution Bench headed by Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi that the Sunni Wakf Board and others on the mosque side had disputed recovery of the slab but had not questioned its authenticity.