Today, On 13th January, The Supreme Court criticized a retired civil services officer for filing a PIL seeking removal of Savarkar portraits, saying, “You are wasting the Court’s time. Please don’t indulge in all this. Enjoy your retirement now. Have a constructive role.”
New Delhi: The Supreme Court criticized a retired civil services officer who filed a public interest litigation (PIL) requesting the removal of portraits of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar from the Indian Parliament and other public spaces.
The court deemed the petition “frivolous and a waste of judicial time.”
Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, leading the Bench, admonished the petitioner, who appeared virtually from Chennai, for exploiting the court’s resources under the pretense of serving public interest.
When the petitioner claimed financial difficulties prevented his appearance in person, the CJI retorted,
“You were in civil services, you can afford to come to Delhi and show yourself and argue. We would like to impose exemplary costs on you. What do you think of yourself?”
The petitioner maintained that his plea was for the public good, prompting a sharp response from the CJI,
“You deposit Rs.1 lakh, so we can impose costs (if dismissed)… Then we will tell you what is the meaning of public interest. You are wasting the Court’s time.”
At this point, the Bench offered the petitioner a choice: either face costs or withdraw the petition. Ultimately, he chose to withdraw.
The CJI inquired,
“What do you want, should we impose costs, or will you withdraw silently?”
Upon agreeing to withdraw, the CJI advised him in a light-hearted manner,
“Please don’t indulge in all this. Enjoy your retirement now. Have some constructive role in society.”
The petition sought to remove portraits and images of Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, including those displayed in Parliament, government offices, and official residences. The Bench determined the petition lacked substance and dismissed it as non-maintainable.
In related developments, in May 2025, the Supreme Court dismissed another PIL attempting to prevent the misuse of Savarkar’s name.
This petition, presented by one Pankaj Phadnis, sought to include the Hindutva ideologue in the schedule of the 1950 Emblems and Names (Prevention of Improper Use) Act.
Case Title: Balasundaram Balamurugan v. Union of India and ors