Today, On 23rd March, The Supreme Court of India closed a petition seeking installation of the National Emblem on its main dome, but said the request would be examined on the administrative side, declining to deal with it judicially while assuring consideration.
The Supreme Court of India closed a petition seeking installation of the National Emblem on top of the Court’s main dome, but agreed to consider the request on the administrative side.
The Court declined to examine the issue in its judicial jurisdiction, yet assured that the plea for displaying the National Emblem on the Supreme Court’s main dome would be looked into administratively.
The Bench consisiting of CJI Surya Kant, Joymalya Bagchi and Vipul Pancholi was hearing a plea seeking a direction to install the national symbol on the dome of the Court building.
At the beginning of the hearing, the Chief Justice told the petitioner that the Court was already constructing a new building and the request could be looked into while taking decisions for that project, saying “the issue would be examined on the administrative side.”
ALSO READ: Karnataka High Court Cracks Down on Illegal Use of National Flag, Emblems & Symbols
The petitioner informed the Bench that he had already written to the Chief Justice’s office in May 2025 and later received a reply on November 27, 2025 stating that the Supreme Court of India uses its own emblem.
Responding to this, the Chief Justice pointed out that the earlier letter had been sent based on an order issued before November 24, 2025, which was prior to the start of his tenure.
He said,
“We will see what’s to be done. Please don’t file a petition on judicial side.”
During the hearing, the Chief Justice told the petitioner,
“We are constructing a new building, we will deal with it then.”
The petitioner, who was arguing the case on his own, then asked,
“What about the present building, Sir?”
The Chief Justice assured him that the matter would be handled appropriately and explained that such issues should be dealt with administratively rather than through court proceedings.
He added,
“This issue you could write to me on the administrative side, instead of filing a petition.”
While disposing of the matter, the Bench clarified that the issue needed to be examined on the administrative side and asked the Secretary General of the Court to place a note before the competent authority for further consideration.
In his petition, Venugopal requested that the Union government and the Supreme Court administration be directed to ensure “statutory and constitutional compliance” when displaying the National Emblem on the court building’s principal architectural element the central dome.
He contended that if any architectural or structural arrangements were inadequate, the relevant institutions should take appropriate technical and institutional steps to permit such a display in accordance with the Constitution and the legal framework that regulates use of the State Emblem.
The plea also asked for a time-bound rollout, preferably within eight weeks, citing the State Emblem of India (Prohibition of Improper Use) Act, 2005 and the State Emblem of India (Regulation of Use) Rules, 2007.
The petition seeks a writ, including mandamus, directing the Union of India and the Supreme Court, through its Registrar, to ensure that the National Emblem is placed on the main architectural feature of the Court its central dome.
Case Title : BADARAVADA VENUGOPAL @ BARA KHATARNAK v. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. , W.P.(C) No. 261/2026