The Madhya Pradesh High Court questioned the police over the delay in taking action after the vandalism of Ambedkar’s statue, asking, “Why has no action been taken yet?” in the ongoing investigation.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court demanded an explanation from the police regarding the lack of action in a case involving the vandalism of a Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar statue in the Seoni district, which occurred over two months ago.
A division bench comprising Chief Justice SK Kait and Justice Vivek Jain issued notices to the Seoni collector and the state government, requesting their responses regarding the incident.
The court is addressing a public interest litigation (PIL) that alleges no arrests have been made since the statue of Dr. Ambedkar, the prominent social reformer and key architect of the Constitution, was damaged on February 10.
The Bench Ordered,
“An affidavit signed by the respondents, Superintendent of Police, Seoni, and the Station House Officer of Police Station Dhuma, Seoni shall be filed indicating why action has not been taken,”
The court has scheduled the next hearing for May 7, requiring the affidavits to be submitted by then.
The court added,
“It is made clear that if action has already been taken, the affidavit shall be filed by the Station House Officer of Police Station, Dhuma, to that effect,”
According to the PIL, filed by Seoni resident Jitendra Ahirwar, an FIR was filed against unidentified individuals on the night of February 10 following the statue’s vandalism.
Also Read: CJI Chandrachud Honors BR Ambedkar with Floral Tributes
However, according to his counsel Dinesh Upadhyay, no action has been taken. Upadhyay argued that instead of arresting the perpetrators, the police allegedly relocated the damaged statue to an undisclosed location and replaced it with a new one.
He emphasized that more than two months have passed without a single arrest.
Upadhyay stated,
“The court has issued notices to the Seoni collector, superintendent of police, Dhuma station house officer, and the state government in response to the PIL”

