The Supreme Court on Monday declined to entertain an urgent oral mentioning concerning the Hanuman Janmabhoomi dispute decided by the Karnataka High Court, observing that the High Court possesses the power to clarify or “speak to” its judgment in appropriate cases.
The matter was mentioned before the Bench of Justice BV Nagarathna and Justice Joymalya Bagchi through an unlisted mentioning. Counsel appearing in the case sought urgent intervention, claiming that an unprecedented situation had arisen as the Karnataka High Court had reserved judgment in the matter and subsequently pronounced it in open court. However, after pronouncement, the case was allegedly listed again for rehearing. Seeking urgent relief, counsel submitted:
“
“The judgment was reserved and pronounced in the open court. After pronouncement, the matter is suddenly kept tomorrow for rehearing.”
The counsel argued that once a judgment is pronounced and signed, the court becomes functus officio, meaning it ordinarily ceases to exercise jurisdiction over the matter except in circumstances recognised by law.
However, the Supreme Court was not persuaded to intervene. Responding to the submission, the Bench pointed out that the Karnataka High Court follows a procedure commonly known as “being spoken to”, under which a court may clarify, correct or address certain issues arising from a judgment.
The controversy arises out of proceedings concerning the Hanuman Janmabhoomi claim relating to Anjanadri Hill in Karnataka, a site revered by many devotees as the birthplace of Lord Hanuman.