- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
SC Issues Notices To Two For Threatening Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan Against Appearing In The Ayodhya Case
[ By Bobby Anthony ]The Supreme Court has sought response from two people for allegedly threatening senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan for taking up the case on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board and other Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case.Earlier, Dhavan had filed a contempt petition against N Shanmugam, who is a retired education officer and a Rajasthan resident...
ToRead the Full Story, Subscribe to
Access the exclusive LEGAL ERAStories,Editorial and Expert Opinion
The Supreme Court has sought response from two people for allegedly threatening senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan for taking up the case on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board and other Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute case.
Earlier, Dhavan had filed a contempt petition against N Shanmugam, who is a retired education officer and a Rajasthan resident Sanjay Kalal Bajrangi, for allegedly threatening him for appearing for Muslim parties.
In Dhavan's petition, a letter allegedly penned by one Professor N Shanmugham has been annexed.
In his letter, Shanmugham has accused Rajeev Dhavan of having betrayed his faith by speaking on behalf of Muslims and “their so called right to Ayodhya”.
Similarly, Dhavan’s petition has quoted several Hindi WhatsApp messages sent by one Sanjay Kalal Bajrangi, screenshots of which were also been annexed to the plea.
Dhavan’s petition stated that he had been accosted both at his home and in the court premises with intimidating behavior by several people.
His plea requested the court to exercise its suo motu powers under Article 129 of the Constitution of India and Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act.
His plea urged the court to take cognizance of the criminal contempt on the basis of the facts placed on record against the contemnor for committing criminal contempt.