Ayodhya Hearing: As Justice UU Lalit recuses, what are the takeaways from today’s hearing?

The hearing in the Ram Mandir-Babri Masjid Ayodhya dispute at the Supreme Court today was brief. However, certain important clarifications and facts came to fore..The matter will be next heard on January 29, when the Court will fix a schedule for the hearing..Below are the key takeaways from today’s hearing:.Justice UU Lalit recuses.When the Bench commenced hearing today, Senior Advocate Rajeev Dhavan brought to the notice of the Court that Justice UU Lalit had appeared for Kalyan Singh in a related case earlier in 1997..Dhavan, however, said that he was not making a request for recusal of the judge, but was only bringing it to the notice of the Court..“I am bringing it to Your Lordships notice though we don’t have objection to him hearing the matter. It is entirely up to Your Lordships.”.Justice Lalit, however, chose to recuse. Hene, the Court said that it has o other option but to adjourn the matter to reconstitute the Bech and fix a schedule for hearing. The order passed by the Court notes,.“The said facts being pointed out, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit has expressed his disinclination to participate in the hearing any further. We, therefore, have no option but to adjourn the case to another date for the same purpose i.e. to fix a date of hearing and to draw up a time schedule for hearing of the case.”.How was the matter placed before the Constitution Bench?.Ever since the notice sending the case to Constitution Bench was issued, there was a lot of debate surrounding how the same could have been done..The issue was raised today by Senior Counsel Rajeev Dhavan and Harish Salve..The Court clarified in its order that it was done by CJI Ranjan Gogoi on the administrative side, pursuant to the Supreme Court Rules 2013. The order states,.“The decision to post the matter before a Five Judges Bench had been taken by the Hon’ble Chief Justice on the administrative side in exercise of his powers under Order VI rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 which mandates that “every cause, appeal or matter shall be heard by a Bench consisting of not less than two Judges nominated by the Chief Justice.”.The Court further clarified that Order VI rule 1 of the Supreme Court Rules, 2013 prescribes the minimum numerical strength of the Bench and it is always open for the Chief Justice to decide, having regard to the various relevant facts and circumstances, which cannot be exhaustively laid down, to constitute Benches of such strength that the Chief Justice deems proper..This is how the present bench of five Judges came to be constituted and it is, in no way, contrary to what has been laid down by the Three Judges Bench in the September 27 judgment..Correctness of voluminous documents.The Court in its order gave details of the sheer size of the documents related to the matter..“The Secretary-General of the Registry has informed the Chief Justice that in the four suits, out of which these appeals have arisen, in all, 120 issues have been framed for trial. A total of 88 witnesses were examined. The depositions of the witnesses run into 13,886 pages. A total of 257 documents were exhibited (according to Dr. Rajeev Dhavan the number of Exhibits is 533 including 3 Archaeological Reports). The judgment runs into 4304 printed pages (according to the Registry, 8533 typed pages). The Bench has been informed that the original records are lying in 15 sealed trunks in a room which has also been sealed.”.It also noted that there is dispute regarding the correctness of translation of the documents which are in Persian, Sanskrit, Arabic, Gurumukhi, Urdu and Hindi..“The orders of this Court, particularly, the order dated 10th August, 2015 indicate that though the learned counsels for the parties had attempted to submit some translated version of the evidence there is a dispute with regard to the correctness of the translations made.”.Taking the above into account, it has asked the Registry to physically inspect the records and make an assessment of the time that will be taken to make the cases ready for hearing by engaging, if required, official translators of the requisite number. A report regarding the same has to be submitted by January 29..So what next?.Since Justice Lalit has recused, the Constitution Bench will be reconstituted. The reconstituted Bench will assemble on January 29 to fix a schedule for the hearing. The Registry will have to submit its report to the Court on or before that date..Read the Order: