Ayodhya case: Muslim parties tell SC how to mould relief in secret submission

The Supreme court has allowed Muslim parties in the Ayodhya land dispute case file their submissions in a sealed cover, the contents of which, however, has been made public after the Hindu group and others raised objections to the apex court keeping submission by parties in a dispute secret.

Muslim parties in the Ayodhya case are reported to have advised the Supreme Court to be mindful of the "future of the country" and the "multi-religious and multicultural values while moulding relief and resolving the issues confronting it” in the land dispute. This has been conveyed to the five-judge Constitution Bench hearing the case in a sealed cover submitted on Saturday. 
However, a lawyer of the Muslim parties in the case said that various parties and the apex court registry had raised objection to the filing of the written note in sealed cover.
"We have now served our written note to all the parties on Sunday," the lawyer said and asked the bench to direct its registry to take their note on record.
The bench which also comprise justices S A Bobde and S A Nazeer, however, pointed out that the contents of the written note, filed in the sealed cover have already been reported in some sections of media.
The contents of the letter were made public after the Hindu parties and others objected to the apex court keeping the contents of the letter a secret.
The Muslim side, in their submission, has insisted that the decision by the court, whichever way it goes, will impact future generations. It will also have consequences for the polity of this country, the letter stated.
This Court's decision may impact the minds of millions who are citizens of this country and who believe in constitutional values embraced by all when India was declared a republic on January 26, 1950, the parties said.
"Since the judgment of this court will have far reaching implications, it is for the court to consider the consequences of its historic judgment by moulding the relief in a fashion that will reflect Constitutional values that this great nation espouses," read the statement, released by five advocates on record - Ejaz Maqbool, Shakil Ahmed Syed, M R Shamshad, Irshad Ahmad and Fuzail Ahmad Ayyubi.
The moulding of relief means telling the court what specific points a party wants it to adjudicate irrespective of the facts of the case. "We hope that the court, in moulding the relief, upholds our multi-religious and multi-cultural values in resolving the issues confronting it," the statement added.
The hearing on the title dispute of the Ram Janmabhoomi has already been concluded and the verdict is expected before 17 November, when Chief Justice of India Ranjan Gogoi retires.
Ram Lala Virajman, Hindu Mahasabha and many other Hindu parties have objected to the Muslim side giving their note on alternate relief in a sealed cover envelope.
"The practice of filing written submission in sealed cover is not permissible as it encourages address to the court in secrecy, keeping the other party in the dark. The placing of sealed cover written submission before Judges would prejudice the rights of other parties," said Bhakti Vardhan Singh, advocate representing one of the Hindu parties.
He also said that filing of written submission is improper and cannot be taken on record.
Meanwhile, Kartik Chopra, spokesperson of the Nirmohi Akhara, said the land should be awarded to them if multicultural values have to be preserved. “Muslim parties had also agreed that the Akhara was worshipping at the spot since a long time,” he said. The Akhara had set up a claim adverse to the deity and questioned the status of the Ram Janmabhoomi as a juristic entity, subject to law.
The Akhara, in its note, said since it is the 'Shebait' - devotee taking care of the deity - therefore it is entitled to possession and management of the disputed site in Ayodhya.
Ram Lalla Virajman has submitted a strongly-worded note seeking the court should give the land to the devotees. "The Muslim parties are not entitled to any equitable relief, more so when the structure is no longer existent. To pray for reconstructing the mosque at the disputed site is inequitable and unjust. It is contrary to Hindu dharma, Islamic law and all principles of justice, equity and good conscience. The small area which is the subject matter of the suit is one integral unit and it is indivisible," said the note.
Ram Lalla also said disputing the suit and its locus standi have disentitled the Nirmohi Akhara from any relief.