‘Heavens are not going to fall’: SC refuses urgent hearing in Ram temple donation case, questions plea for immediate listing

‘Heavens are not going to fall’: SC refuses urgent hearing in Ram temple donation case, questions plea for immediate listing

The Supreme Court on Friday declined a request for an urgent hearing in a case related to alleged irregularities in donations made for the Ram temple, observing that "the heavens are not going to fall" if the matter is heard according to the regular court schedule.

The remarks came when the petitioner's counsel sought an immediate listing of the matter before the apex court, arguing that the issue required urgent judicial intervention. However, the Bench questioned the basis for seeking priority treatment and asked what exceptional circumstances justified bypassing the normal listing process.

"There is no such urgency. The heavens are not going to fall," the court remarked while refusing to entertain the request for an expedited hearing.

The petition concerns allegations surrounding the handling of donations linked to the Ram temple and seeks judicial directions regarding the matter. While the petitioner pressed for an early hearing, the court indicated that the case could be taken up in the ordinary course without causing any irreversible consequences.

The Bench also observed that the judicial system cannot treat every matter as one requiring immediate attention, emphasising that urgent listings are reserved for cases involving exceptional circumstances or imminent harm.

The Supreme Court's refusal to grant an urgent hearing does not amount to a dismissal of the petition. Instead, the matter will now proceed through the regular listing process and be heard as per the court's schedule.

The case has attracted public attention given its connection to the Ram temple, one of the country's most significant religious and cultural landmarks. However, the court's observations underline its consistent approach that requests for urgent hearings must satisfy established legal thresholds.

Legal experts note that the apex court routinely assesses whether a matter involves immediate and irreparable consequences before agreeing to advance its hearing date. In the absence of such circumstances, petitions are generally listed according to the normal roster.

The petition is expected to come up before the Supreme Court at a later date in accordance with the court's standard procedures, when both sides will have an opportunity to present their arguments on the merits of the case.