The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain an urgent plea in the Hanuman Janmabhoomi dispute, directing the petitioner to approach the Karnataka High Court. A bench led by Justice B.V. Nagarathna observed that the High Court follows a well-known procedure called 'being spoken to', under which it can clarify, correct, or address issues arising from a judgment.
Background of the Dispute
The Hanuman Janmabhoomi dispute involves a temple in Karnataka, with claims over the ownership and management of the site. The petitioner sought urgent intervention from the Supreme Court, citing delays in the High Court proceedings. However, the bench noted that the High Court is competent to handle the matter under its existing procedures.
Supreme Court's Observation
Justice Nagarathna remarked that the Karnataka High Court's 'being spoken to' procedure allows parties to seek clarifications or corrections without filing a fresh appeal. This mechanism, she said, is designed to ensure efficient resolution of post-judgment issues. The court advised the petitioner to avail this remedy before approaching the apex court.
According to court records, the petitioner had argued that the High Court had not addressed certain key points in its earlier order. The Supreme Court, however, declined to intervene, stating that it would not be appropriate to bypass the High Court's jurisdiction at this stage.
Legal Implications
Legal experts note that the Supreme Court's decision reinforces the principle of judicial hierarchy, where lower courts are expected to first exhaust their remedies. The 'being spoken to' procedure is unique to the Karnataka High Court and is seen as a flexible tool to rectify errors or oversights without lengthy appeals.
The petitioner's counsel expressed disappointment but indicated that they would now approach the Karnataka High Court as directed. The dispute has been ongoing for several years, with multiple hearings at the High Court level.
Next Steps
The matter is now expected to be taken up by the Karnataka High Court, which will hear the petitioner's plea under its 'being spoken to' jurisdiction. The Supreme Court has not set any timeline for further intervention, leaving the High Court to proceed as per its schedule.
