Five lawyers file suit against Pranab Mukherjee for “objectionable” statements in his book [Updated]

A civil suit has been filed against President of India Pranab Mukherjee in the Patiala House court for an allegedly “false, objectionable and incorrect narration” of events in his book The Turbulent Years in 1980-1996..The petition, filed by five advocates from Uttar Pradesh, has taken objection to the contents in the book regarding the Ram Mandir and the surrounding controversy..President Pranab Mukherjee is the first respondent in the matter while Roopa Publications, which published the book in question, has been arraigned as the second respondent..The petitioners have prayed for declaration that some statements made in the book are false, the deletion of certain “objectionable portions”, and a ban on the publication of the book until such deletion takes place..One of the primary objections is with regard to the opening of the locks of the Ram Janmabhoomi complex. The book, it has been alleged, states that the locks to the complex was opened after the orders from Rajiv Gandhi. The petitioners have submitted that it is incorrect and the locks were opened pursuant to the order of District Judge, Faizabad..The petition states,.“..from the judicial records it is apparent that locks of Shri Ram Janmabhumi Complex were opened under the orders of District Judge, Faizabad passed in a judicial proceeding (Annexure No. 1 to the plaint)..That despite the above facts, the author of the book/defendant no. 1 at page 128-129, while pointing out the error of judgment of the then Prime Minister Late Rajiv Gandhi, has given following facts:.Rajiv’s actions on the Shah Bano judgment and the Muslims Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Bill drew criticism and eroded his modern image. .The opening of the Ram Janmabhoomi temple site on 1 February 1986 was perhaps another error of judgment. People felt these actions could have been avoided.”.The petitioners have contended that these comments “tarnish the image of judiciary”, and constitute criminal contempt of court..The petitioners have also taken objection to statements regarding the demolition of Babri Masjid and the alleged role of Hindu organisations in the same. They have contended that the same would affect the judicial proceedings pending in the Supreme Court..“…by making aforesaid bald averments against Hindus and openly in favour of Babri Masjid the author has given and let to believe that the demolished structure was a Mosque and that Hindus and Hindu organizations in general are responsible of intolerant act. The statements made by author as mentioned above adversely affect the pending judicial proceedings between the parties in the Apex Court..They have also submitted that they are pained by the one-sided version given by the author..“That the Plaintiffs are devotees of Lord Ram. They are sympathizers of Hindu organizations and are its members. The plaintiffs are adversely affected by such statement of wrong facts and they feel duty bound to protect the interest of the community and also their religious rights conferred by Article 25 of the Constitution of India. The Plaintiffs and the Hindus in general have been shocked and pained due to the one sided version given by the author who is holding a responsible Office like as the President of India.”.Update: Advocates Hari Shankar Jain and Vishnu Shankar Jain will be representing the petitioners. The matter is listed for 2 pm today in the court of District and Sessions judge Amar Nath.