New Delhi, Dec 7 (IANS): The Supreme Court on Monday questioned filing of a plea by a 94-year-old woman for a compensation of Rs 25 crore on account of "trauma" due to the Emergency in 1975 and declaring it "unconstitutional", but later adjourned it to next week for hearing.

A bench headed by Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy questioned "what kind of a plea is this" and that too after so many years.

Her counsel then informed the court that the matter would be argued by Senior Advocate Harish Salve, after which the court said it would hear it next week.

"Declare that the proclamation of Emergency vide a notification dated June 25, 1975, as wholly unconstitutional and actions pursuant to the same as illegal and unjustifiable. The petitioner may kindly be compensated to the tune of Rs 25 crore to be recovered from authorities concerned for having participated in the unconstitutional acts," said petitioner Veena Sarin in her plea.

Sarin's counsel also cited Allahabad High Court orders in July last to direct for the payment of rent arrears vis-a-vis her husband's property that was subjected to proceedings during the Emergency.

The instant plea said that the petitioner was aggrieved by the "trauma and harassment" faced by her and her family, including her now-deceased husband, from June 1975 when Emergency was declared.

The plea argued that the freedoms guaranteed under Article 19 of the Constitution and the rights of citizens to move any court for enforcement of their Fundamental Rights remained suspended till the end of Emergency 21 months later.

The petitioner submitted that she and her husband were compelled to leave the country due to fear that they could be jailed on the whims and fancies of the authorities.

The petitioner, who now lives with her daughter in Dehradun, alleged that her husband's gold art business in Karol Bagh and Connaught Place in Delhi was ceased by the authorities concerned and the family threatened. Even their properties and valuables were forcibly taken away, she claimed.

Sarin said that she single-handedly faced all proceedings initiated against her husband during the Emergency period.