At the centre of the Venu Srinivasan idol theft FIR quashing appeals sits a factual dispute: Tamil Nadu told the Supreme Court on Wednesday that an antique peacock idol existed at Chennai’s Kapaleeswarar Temple before its alleged replacement.
New Delhi: A batch of petitions against the Madras High Court’s February 2024 decision to quash the FIR against TVS Motor Company Chairman Emeritus Venu Srinivasan in the Kapaleeswarar Temple idol theft case came up before the Supreme Court on Wednesday. The State of Tamil Nadu maintained that the antique peacock idol was there before it was allegedly replaced during renovation [M. Muthiah Sthapathy v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another, with connected matters].
The Bench of Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M. Pancholi listed the matter for further hearing on October 29, 2026 at 2 PM. Additional Advocate General Prashanto Chandra appeared for the State of Tamil Nadu.
The State’s case on the idol
Additional Advocate General Prashanto Chandra argued for Tamil Nadu that a resolution allegedly passed before the temple’s Kumbhabhishekam on August 30, 2004 indicated that the idol had been replaced before the ceremony.
The State also maintained that an idol was present before the alleged theft, which it offered in answer to the contention that no peacock-with-flower idol ever existed.
What is alleged
The case concerns an antique peacock idol at the Punnaivananathar Sannidhi of the Sri Kapaleeswarar Temple in Chennai. The allegation is that the idol was taken out during renovation work in 2004 and replaced with an apparently identical one, in which the bird holds a snake in its beak instead of a flower.
Venu Srinivasan served on a government-constituted committee overseeing the renovation. These are allegations. They are untested, this report expresses no view on the merits, and he is presumed innocent.
From a complaint to the Supreme Court
Proceedings were initiated in August 2018 by temple activist Rangarajan Narasimhan, who alleged irregularities involving the idol and officials of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. The Idol Wing of the Tamil Nadu Police registered an FIR in 2018, and in 2022 it filed a final report naming Venu Srinivasan and others.
He then went to the Madras High Court, which allowed his plea on February 16, 2024 and quashed the FIR against him. Narasimhan is among those who have challenged that decision before the Supreme Court.
Venu Srinivasan’s position
Venu Srinivasan denies involvement in the alleged theft. His stated position is that he was not responsible for the temple’s day-to-day administration and that he contributed Rs 70 lakh from personal funds toward its restoration. His counsel’s submissions at the hearing are not recorded here.
The question the batch raises
The Supreme Court has to consider whether the High Court was right to quash the FIR when the Idol Wing had already filed its final report. The State’s submissions show that a factual dispute, whether the original idol existed and when it was replaced, lies at the centre of the appeals. The Court has not recorded any finding on that dispute, and the matter returns on October 29.
Case Title: M. Muthiah Sthapathy v. State of Tamil Nadu and Another, with connected matters (case number to be verified)
Bench: Justices Aravind Kumar and Vipul M. Pancholi, Supreme Court of India
Date of Hearing: October 14, 2026; next hearing October 29, 2026
Appearances: Additional Advocate General Prashanto Chandra for the State of Tamil Nadu