A criminal defamation complaint against Dhirendra Shastri over his alleged remarks about Lord Krishna during a Ram Katha in Madhya Pradesh has been registered by an Agra court, which has fixed December 14 for the next hearing. The allegations are those of the complainant and are untested, and the court has recorded no finding.
Agra: A criminal defamation complaint has been filed before an Agra court against Bageshwar Dham head priest Dhirendra Krishna Shastri over his alleged remarks about Lord Krishna during a religious discourse in Madhya Pradesh. The complaint, filed on November 4 by Advocate Ajay Pratap Singh, came up for a preliminary hearing before Civil Judge Kanchan Kumar, who registered the case and fixed December 14 as the next date of hearing [Ajay Pratap Singh v. Dhirendra Krishna Shastri].
The complaint alleges that the remarks are derogatory, that they hurt religious sentiments, and that they damage the social standing of the descendants of Lord Krishna. No finding has been made against Shastri, and the court has not examined the merits of the allegations.
What the complaint says
The complaint says Shastri made the remarks while comparing the postures of Lord Ram and Lord Krishna, and it attributes these words to him:
Those who follow Krishna might feel bad, but Krishna is very crooked. Even when he stands, he is bent at three places.
In the complaint, Singh describes himself as a descendant of Lord Krishna through his maternal side and says the remarks therefore harmed his own social reputation. To support that link, the complaint points to historical references to communities that trace their lineage to the Yadu line, including the Jadoons, Jadejas and Bhatis, and cites the Mathura Gazetteer and the writings of the British archaeologist Alexander Cunningham.
Where the case stands
Filed on November 4, the complaint was taken up for a preliminary hearing by Civil Judge Kanchan Kumar, who registered the case and listed it for December 14. The date of the preliminary hearing and the provisions invoked in the complaint have not been stated, and no summoning order or other direction has been recorded so far.
The Karera discourse
The remarks at the centre of the dispute were made at a Ram Katha in Karera, in Madhya Pradesh’s Shivpuri district, in the last days of October. Shastri compared the forms and postures of Lord Ram and Lord Krishna, saying Lord Ram stands straight while Lord Krishna stands bent in three places, a reference to the deity’s ‘tribhanga’ posture. He also drew comparisons involving Lord Krishna’s flute, Vrindavan and Ayodhya.
A video of the discourse circulated on social media. Seers and devotees of Lord Krishna from Mathura and Vrindavan objected, saying that Lord Ram and Lord Krishna are equally revered and that such a comparison was inappropriate.
Shastri’s clarification
Two days before the complaint was filed, Shastri had already responded publicly. In a video message posted on social media from Nairobi, Kenya, on Monday, November 2, he said he did not intend to draw any distinction between Lord Ram and Lord Krishna. His comments, he said, were made in the context of the devotional tradition and the loving expressions of Braj, and were not meant to insult any deity.
Describing himself as a devotee of Lord Krishna who also narrates the Bhagavad Katha, Shastri said Lord Rama and Lord Krishna are manifestations of the same supreme being. He added that if anyone was offended by his emotional remarks, he humbly apologised. The apology did not end the controversy, and the complaint followed two days later.
Political reactions
The remarks also drew political comment. On November 2, Samajwadi Party president Akhilesh Yadav, without naming Shastri, alleged that derogatory comparisons between revered Hindu deities were aimed at undermining the unity of the Sanatan community, and demanded punitive action, saying the matter should be taken up at the highest level.
The legal framework
Defamation is an offence under Section 356 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, which replaced Section 499 of the Indian Penal Code. Under Section 222 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, a court takes cognisance of defamation only on a complaint made by a person aggrieved by the offence. Under Section 223, the Magistrate examines the complainant before taking cognisance, and the accused must be given an opportunity of being heard before cognisance is taken.
Why the hearing matters
Registration of a complaint is an early procedural step. It does not amount to a finding that the words were spoken as alleged, that they were defamatory, or that any offence is made out. At the stages ahead, the court has still to consider whether the complainant qualifies as a person aggrieved, a question on which his claim of descent from Lord Krishna will be central, and whether the remarks fall within the offence at all.
The case also sits at the point where religious sentiment and reputation law meet. Shastri’s clarification and apology, the objections of devotees and the political reactions will all remain outside the court’s consideration unless they are placed on record, and the proceedings will turn on what the complaint and the evidence establish when the matter is next heard on December 14. The allegations are untested, and the presumption of innocence applies to Shastri.
Case Title: Ajay Pratap Singh v. Dhirendra Krishna Shastri (title to be verified)
Court: Civil Judge Kanchan Kumar, Agra
Complaint filed: November 4, 2026
Next hearing: December 14, 2026
