Today, On 18th September, In the CJI’s Deity Remark Row, Solicitor General Tushar Mehta cautioned that every action today faces an unequal reaction on social media. He warned that such misrepresentation can distort public perception and impact the credibility of institutions.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta today came to the defense of Chief Justice of India BR Gavai, who expressed concerns about being misquoted regarding his recent comments on the Lord Vishnu idol in Khajuraho.
The Chief Justice clarified his statements made during a hearing on the restoration of a 7-foot beheaded idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.
CJI Gavai stated in court while addressing the backlash over his remarks,
“I recently heard that my remarks were portrayed on social media in a certain way. I want to clarify that I have respect for all religions.”
SG Mehta expressed that the situation had been exaggerated based on entirely inaccurate information that misrepresented the CJI’s comments, which were taken out of context. He noted his long acquaintance with the CJI, emphasizing that Gavai visits all religious sites with equal respect and would never intend to insult any deity.
Mehta remarked,
“Something else was being said. It is really unfortunate. My Lordship is so secular and visits all religious places with reverence.”
He further highlighted the impact of social media reactions, saying,
“Earlier we used to read the Newtons law that every action has an equal reaction and now every action has an unequal social media reaction. Your lordship would never even imagine saying anything disrespectful against any religion.”
Justice Vinod Chandran, sitting alongside CJI Gavai, echoed concerns about the detrimental effects of uninformed social media posts, sharing his own experience of recusing himself from a case due to an appearing lawyer.
He remarked that social media is, in fact, akin to anti-social media.
Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal, who was also present in the courtroom, added a short but sharp remark,
“We suffer everyday.”
Earlier, This week, the Supreme Court of India dismissed a petition seeking to replace a damaged, 7-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.
The petitioner argued that restoring the idol, which was decapitated during Mughal invasions centuries ago, was vital for reviving the temple’s sanctity and resuming worship.
The temple, constructed by the Chandela rulers between 1050 and 1075 AD, is part of the Khajuraho complex, renowned for its remarkable architecture and recognized as a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Devotees have long claimed that the broken idol has hindered prayers at the sanctum sanctorum.
Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai, who led the bench, dismissed the plea sharply.
He remarked to petitioner Rakesh Dalal, who has been advocating for the restoration of broken idols across various temples,
“This is purely publicity interest litigation, Go and ask the deity itself to do something now. You say you are a staunch devotee of Lord Vishnu. So go and pray now.”
This comment, delivered in open court, was meant to be sarcastic but quickly resonated outside the courtroom. For Dalal and his supporters, the ruling represented not only a legal setback but also a blow to their religious sentiments.
Following the judgment, protests erupted at Jantar Mantar in New Delhi, led by local groups and religious activists demanding government action to restore the idol. Dalal submitted a memorandum to Home Minister Amit Shah, urging immediate intervention.
On social media, the backlash was swift and fierce.
One user noted,
“At times words hurt you more than knives, an insult that will echo for generations.”
Others took it further, with notable figures, including retired officials and influencers, calling for the impeachment of the Chief Justice.
Posts advocating for “Impeach the CJI” gained significant traction, revealing a stark divide between constitutional restraint and public sentiment.
This controversy highlights a profound tension between religious devotion and secular constitutional law.
The court clarified that worshippers are free to pray at other temples but refused to alter a centuries-old artifact in a protected heritage site. For the judges, the focus was on preserving historical continuity, while for the devotees, the desire was to restore a vital space for faith.
As the discussion intensifies, this case highlights the delicate balance India’s courts must navigate when addressing matters of faith, history, and law. Meanwhile, the headless idol in Khajuraho remains untouched, its silence now amplified by the echoes of a courtroom exchange that has sparked a national outcry.
Advocate Vineet Jindal said he has written to the Chief Justice of India, Justice B R Gavai, seeking immediate withdrawal of his remarks against Lord Vishnu, calling them hurtful to Hindu sentiments.
He added that a copy of the letter has also been sent to the President of India to ensure national attention on the issue, expressing hope that both the Supreme Court and the President will take the matter seriously and uphold the dignity of every faith in the country.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
