The UPA government acquiesced in DMK's position in the Sethusamudram case to question in the Supreme Court the existence of Ram Setu by citing the scriptures and Puranas. Unperturbed by the withdrawal of its earlier affidavit doubting the existence of Ramayana, Rama and their link to Ram Setu, which had created a furore, the Centre, through senior advocate Fali S Nariman, cited the ninth-century Ramayana of Kamban and also the "Padma Purana" to tell the court that if Rama constructed Ram Setu, he had also destroyed it. Earlier the UPA government had taken the stand there was no historical evidence about the existence of Ram and so the construction of the setu by him had no historical base. Now this affidavit states that even if he existed and got the setu constructed he got the same destroyed too according to the mythical records available. The small elelment of fallacy in the stand of the Centre is obvious.