Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai has clarified his stance on remarks he made during a hearing regarding a damaged Lord Vishnu idol, stating that he respects all religions. The clarification comes after social media criticism of his comments made during the dismissal of a plea seeking the reconstruction and reinstallation of a seven-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari Temple in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh.
On Tuesday, a bench led by CJI Gavai dismissed a plea from Rakesh Dalal, who requested directions for the replacement and consecration of the damaged idol at the Javari Temple in the Chhatarpur district. The court deemed the plea a "publicity interest litigation". During the proceedings, the CJI was quoted as saying, "Go and ask the deity himself to do something. If you are saying that you are a strong devotee of Lord Vishnu, then you pray and do some meditation". He also suggested that if the petitioner was not "averse to Shaivism," they could visit the Shiva temple in Khajuraho, which houses a large Shiva lingam. The bench noted that the issue fell under the jurisdiction of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).
These remarks sparked controversy on social media, with some Hindu organizations claiming that the CJI had "mocked" their beliefs. Some social media users called for the CJI's impeachment, asserting that his comments hurt religious sentiments. Advocates also wrote to CJI Gavai, urging him to retract his statement against Lord Vishnu and Sanatan Dharma.
Responding to the criticism, CJI Gavai stated, "Someone told me the other day that the comments I made have been portrayed in social media in a certain manner...I respect all religions". He made the clarification in open court, emphasizing his belief in "true secularism" and his visits to places of worship of every faith. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, who was present in the courtroom, vouched for CJI Gavai's reverence for all religions, stating that he has known the CJI for over a decade and has seen him visit temples and religious sites of all faiths.
The CJI's initial remarks were intended to convey that the court could not intervene in the matter because the area is a protected monument under the ASI. He clarified that his comments had been taken out of context. Justice Chandran also shared that he recused himself from a public interest litigation involving the Vedanta group after people inquired if he had shares in Vedanta.
