CJI’s remarks on the Lord Vishnu idol ignite public anger
The entire Judiciary in India was jolted and shocked to hear that a 71-year-old lawyer hurled a shoe at the Chief Justice of India inside the Supreme Court. The provocation stemmed from a PIL. On September 16, the Supreme Court, headed by a Bench of the Chief Justice, was hearing a petition seeking directions to reconstruct/ replace or rejuvenate the seven-foot Lord Vishnu idol at the Javari temple, which forms a part of the Khajuraho group of monuments, a UNESCO World Heritage site in Madhya Pradesh. The Chief Justice, dismissing the plea, remarked, “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.” After 48 hours of incessant social media outrage over his oral remarks made in the hearing on the damaged Lord Vishnu idol, the Chief Justice of India broke his silence to clarify in open court that he believes in all religions, visits sites of worship of every faith, and firmly trusts in “true secularism”. But irreparable damage had already been done just because of an insouciant remark expressed callously. He is fortunate that the remark was not delivered against any foreign faiths, for that would have earned him international approbation and condemnation, and also the prospect of supplicating to the government to grant ‘Z’ category security for life.
Former Lord Chancellor of England, Francis Bacon (1561–1626), said, “A much-talking judge is like an ill-tuned cymbal.” He also made a perspicacious observation, valid for all who occupy judicial and quasi-judicial positions – “Judges ought to remember that their office is to interpret law, and not to make law, or give law.”
Charles Ernest Grassley, an American politician who served as the President Pro Tempore of the United States Senate, expressed the view that “Supreme Court nominees should know that this exercise of judicial restraint is the key ingredient of being a good judge, as the Constitution constrains judges every bit as much as it constrains we legislators, executives and citizens in their actions”.
For politicians and physicians, it is a very common experience to face assaults by slippers, stones, tar paint, ink, and even physical assaults. Sometimes, many members of the subordinate judiciary have also undergone the brunt of the anger, frustration, and helplessness of litigants. Even lawyers have expressed their ire in various forms, despite their outward show of addressing judges as “Your Lordship”, “My Lord”, “Your Honour”, and so on.
Judges occupying higher positions in the judiciary are not elected like legislators nor selected on merit as bureaucrats. They have a secretive Collegium system, which does not function in a democratic manner. Many incumbents, therefore, think that they are not accountable to anybody. This is a very fallacious thinking, for public outrage can erupt anytime into public revolt. As it is, the judiciary in India is sitting on a mountain of unresolved cases, many pending for decades. Public anger against institutions often erupts into mass mobilizations that can have devastating effects. Recently, many countries have witnessed mass mobilizations, against which the Police and Army are reluctant to act. We live in an age when a coordinated web of influencers for hire can launch campaigns against the judiciary, or digital mercenaries can unleash any kind of online campaign.
The Chief Justice, inadvertently or contemptuously, made the remark that wounded the religious sentiments of over 1000+ million Hindus in India and across the globe. A belated retraction and recital that “I respect all religions” cannot assuage the hurt and umbrage of millions of people. While God does not need the respect of any human being, affront to the divine will be sorted out by suitable karmic retribution.
Many modern-day judges might not be familiar with what Greek philosopher Socrates prescribed as four key characteristics of a good judge: to “listen courteously; to answer wisely; to consider soberly; and to decide impartially”. The 2024 WJP Rule of Law Index evaluates 142 countries and jurisdictions around the world. While Denmark tops the list for the best judicial system, India ranks 79, below even many African countries. No doubt India’s judicial system is a vast organization, and people also have become highly litigation-minded, but there is no proper control and superintendence over the quasi-judicial bodies that flood the system every day with substandard orders favouring their department’s stand. But this does not entitle the higher judiciary to pass intemperate remarks that can cause unrest among the people.
Judges should not allow the people to echo the words of American evangelist David Ray Wilkerson, best known for his book The Cross and the Switchblade – “Our nation is being led astray by ungodly judges, mayors and governors, who are given to change, defying the Constitution and substituting their own wicked agendas”.
Note:
1. Text in Blue points to additional data on the topic.
2. The views expressed here are those of the author and do not necessarily represent or reflect the views of PGurus.
For all the latest updates, download PGurus App.
- Slippered! How a courtroom outburst shocked India’s judiciary - October 10, 2025
- The role of religiosity in the drug therapeutic space - October 1, 2025
- Evolution of democracies into studentocracies - September 17, 2025
