The Supreme Court of India has recently reiterated its stance against the use of public funds for constructing statues, particularly those intended to glorify political leaders. This position underscores the judiciary's concern over the appropriate utilization of taxpayer money and the need to prevent the promotion of political parties or leaders at the expense of public welfare.

In a recent case, a Supreme Court bench comprising Justices Vikram Nath and Prashant Kumar Mishra rejected a plea by the Tamil Nadu government to install a bronze statue of former Chief Minister M. Karunanidhi in the Tirunelveli district. The court firmly stated, "It is not permitted. Why are you using public funds for glorifying your former leaders?". This decision upheld an earlier order by the Madras High Court, which had also denied permission for the installation. The Supreme Court further suggested that the Tamil Nadu government could approach the High Court for appropriate relief if necessary.

The Madras High Court, in its original ruling, asserted that state governments cannot issue orders granting permission to install statues in public places, as such installations often lead to traffic congestion and other inconveniences for the public. The High Court emphasized the importance of protecting the rights of citizens and noted that allowing such installations would contradict previous Supreme Court orders.

This is not the first time the Supreme Court has addressed the issue of using public funds for statues. In January 2025, the Supreme Court disposed of a 2009 Public Interest Litigation (PIL) concerning the construction of statues of former Uttar Pradesh Chief Minister Mayawati and her party symbol, the elephant, in public spaces in Uttar Pradesh. The court, however, directed that all political parties must adhere to the directives issued by the Election Commission of India (ECI) regarding the use of public funds for propagating party symbols.

The 2009 PIL had alleged that over ₹1000 crore from the state exchequer was misused for installing these statues in Lucknow and Noida. The petitioners sought a CBI probe, the removal of the statues, and a freeze on the BSP's election symbol, arguing that the expenditure violated constitutional principles. While disposing of the petition, the Supreme Court considered that removing the statues would require additional public funds, which would not serve the public interest. The court also took note of the ECI's circular that prohibits political parties from using public funds or government resources for activities that promote the party or its election symbol.

Mayawati had defended the construction of the statues, stating that it represented the will of the people and was approved by the state legislature. She argued that the statues were intended to honor the values and ideals of social reformers and leaders, not to promote the BSP or herself.

The Supreme Court's consistent stance reflects a broader concern about the misuse of public resources for partisan purposes. By directing political parties to comply with the ECI's guidelines, the court aims to ensure that public funds are used judiciously and that a level playing field is maintained during elections. The court's decisions underscore the importance of upholding constitutional principles and safeguarding the rights of citizens.