Age, faith, courtroom : Untold story of Ram Lalla’s legal team

Sanatan’s Saint Pujya (Mrs) Uma Ravichandran presenting Shriram’s picture to Advocate K Parasaran

New Delhi : On the eve of a crucial hearing in the Ayodhya case, the legal team arguing for the title of the disputed site for the construction of the Ram mandir found itself facing a crisis. The team’s speaker, nonagenarian legal luminary K Parasaran, found that the notes he had prepared for ‘Suit number 5’ had gone missing. To compound matters, he was running a fever and his glaucoma made reading nearly impossible. Worse, the lawyer’s memory – who was often referred to as the Bhishma Pitamah of the Bar – also appeared to be playing tricks.

“For the first time, my memory is failing me,” a distressed Parasaran had confessed. His associates stepped in and worked until 4 a.m. to reconstruct the arguments that the veteran had crafted in the sessions preparatory for the hearing.

A recall of the arguments did the trick, with Parasaran able to remember the line he wanted to take, and this proved to be crucial in persuading the SC.

Parasaran, assisted by a bunch of dedicated young lawyers, worked tirelessly for a year to persuade SC in favour of Lord Ram. Six years after the verdict and temple at the disputed site, two youngsters of Parasaran’s team – Anirudh Sharma and Sridhar Potaraju – have recorded the legal journey of Lord Ram in the biggest courtroom of SC before a five-judge bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi in a book titled ‘Case for Ram : The Untold Insiders’ Story’.

For Parasaran, case a befitting finale for his 7-decade career

The Ayodhya title dispute is one of India’s most historically significant and emotionally charged cases, which saw divinity enter the courtroom as a litigant, with ‘Ram Lalla Virajman’ being the plaintiff seeking restoration of title over a piece of land which devotees for generations believed to be his birthplace.

The dispute had taken on a communal dimension and lingered on for more than a century and half, 70 of which had been spent in courts. “Ram has defined and changed my life. My last wish is to see a temple come up at his birthplace,” the book quoted him as saying.

While Parasaran focused on Hindus having uninterrupted adverse possession of the disputed land, Senior Advocate C S Vaidyanathan took the court through archaeological evidences pointing towards pre-existence of a big temple, over which the mosque was built.

Senior advocates Ranjit Kumar and PS Narasimha (now an SC judge) pitched in. The book says that in Aug 2019, the then CJI Gogoi, in an unprecedented gesture, offered that Adv. K Parasaran could argue while seated. The lawyer declined.

“Your Lordships are too kind. The tradition of the Bar has been to stand and argue,” he said. For him, standing was a mark of respect, both to the court, and especially in his Lord’s case. “It is my Lord’s case. I argued all kinds of cases standing. I cannot be sitting and arguing my own Lord’s case … I don’t mind even if I die arguing while standing,” Adv. K Parasaran said. The case involved one of the most novel legal questions – whether the land itself (Ram Janmabhoomi) could be considered a ‘Juristic Person’ with the right to sue.

SC questioned how a birthplace could hold legal personality, the book reveals.

Adv. K Parasaran, digging deep into his knowledge of Scriptures, argued that in Hinduism, Idols alone are not treated as objects of worship – rivers, the sun, and even birthplaces can be sacred.

The issue divided his own team, with some like PV Yogiswaran and Aditi believing it was a legally risky argument.

Despite internal dissent, Adv. K Parasaran held his ground, ready to defend the proposition as a reflection of Hindu belief and practice.

Vaidyanathan delved into the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) report, which indicated the remains of a massive Hindu temple-like structure beneath the Babri Masjid.

He presented evidence of pillar bases, a circular shrine, carvings of Hindu Deities, and inscriptions – arguing that the site had been a place of Hindu worship for centuries, the book stated. SC’s final judgment on Nov 9, 2019, awarded the entire disputed site to the Hindu side, paving the way for the Ram Temple, marking a hard-fought win for Adv. K Parasaran and his Lord.

(Courtesy : timesofindia.indiatimes.com)

Despite dissent, Adv. K Parasaran held his ground, ready to defend the proposition as a reflection of Hindu belief and practice !