New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday sought response from two persons, including an 88-year-old retired government servant, on a contempt plea for allegedly threatening and hurling curses at senior advocate Rajeev Dhavan for taking up the case on behalf of the Sunni Waqf Board and other Muslim parties in the Ram Janmabhoomi-Babri Masjid land dispute matter. “Notice,” said the five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi at the start of the hearing on the 18th day in the land dispute case, even before senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for Dhavan, opened his arguments. Also Read – India gets first tranche of Swiss bank a/c details The bench has put up the contempt plea for hearing after two weeks. N Shanmugam, 88, a retired education officer, had allegedly written a letter to Dhavan saying that physical disabilities will befall him for taking up the case on behalf of Muslim parties against the deity ‘Ram Lalla’. Dhavan had filed a contempt petition against Shanmugam and Rajasthan resident Sanjay Kalal Bajrangi. Bajrangi had allegedly threatened Dhavan against appearing for Muslim parties. Also Read – Tourists to be allowed in J&K from Thursday Dhavan, who appeared for lead petitioner M Siddiq and the All India Sunni Waqf Board, had said that he received a letter on August 14, 2019 from Shanmugam. Dhavan had said in the plea that he has also received a WhatsApp message from Bajrangi, which was also an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice before the apex court. He had alleged that he has been accosted both at home and in court premises. The plea said that by sending the letter the alleged contemnor has committed criminal contempt because “he is intimidating a senior advocate who is appearing for a party/parties before the apex court and discharging his duties as a senior advocate and he ought not to have sent such a letter.” “Exercise suo motu powers under Article 129 of the Constitution of India and Section 15 of the Contempt of Courts Act taking cognisance of the criminal contempt on the basis of facts placed on record against contemnor/opposite party for committing criminal contempt,” the plea said.