Receiving threats on Facebook: Lawyer representing Muslim parties in Babri Masjid land dispute case tells SC

New Delhi: Senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan, representing Muslim parties in the Ayodhya Babri Masjid land dispute case, on Thursday submitted before the Supreme Court (SC) that he has been receiving threats on social media for appearing in the matter. [caption id=“attachment_7061311” align=“alignleft” width=“380”] File image of the Supreme Court of India. Reuters[/caption] “I am receiving threats on Facebook for appearing against in the case,” he submitted before a five-judge constitution bench, headed by chief justice of India Ranjan Gogoi. However, Dhawan has said that he does not need any security at this point. Dhavan said that people tell him “Don’t fight (argue) against the deity in the Supreme Court”. “I don’t need any security at this point and I also don’t want to file contempt petition one after the other either,” Dr Dhavan told the court. The lawyer also submitted that an Uttar Pradesh minister had said that the judiciary, administration and the nation belonged to the BJP. “Ram temple will be constructed as the matter is in Supreme Court and the SC is ours. The judiciary, administration, the nation as well as the Ram Temple belong to us,” minister Mukut Bihari Verma had said. Dhavan had already filed a contempt petition against an 88-year-old professor in Chennai, for cursing him and threatening him not appear before the apex court and to argue for the Muslim side in the case. Dhavan had filed the contempt petitition against professor from Chennai, N Shanmugam for allegedly threatening him and asked him not to appear for the Muslim parties in the sensitive Ayodhya Babri masjid land dispute case. On 8 August, a five-judge bench headed by CJI and including Justices DY Chandrachud, SA Bobde, Ashok Bhushan and SA Abdul Nazeer, had said that it will hear the Ayodhya title dispute case five days in the week, from Monday to Friday. The court is hearing appeals against the 30 September, 2010 verdict of the Allahabad High Court in the case.