Judicial Sensitivity Questioned: Delhi Advocate Appeals to CJI & President Over Controversial Remarks
(Judicial Quest News Network)
New Delhi, September 16, 2025 — Advocate Vineet Jindal has approached the Supreme Court expressing concern over remarks made during a recent hearing related to the reconstruction and reinstallation of a dilapidated idol of Lord Vishnu at the historic Javari Temple, part of the UNESCO World Heritage Khajuraho complex.
In his submission, Jindal, a self-described follower of Sanatan Dharma and a devoted citizen of India, stated that the comments made during the proceedings were deeply hurtful to religious sentiments. The Letter in question seeks directions for the restoration of the Vishnu idol, which holds cultural and spiritual significance for many devotees.
Jindal emphasized that while the Hon’ble Court retains full discretion in entertaining or dismissing petitions, such discretion must be exercised in a manner that respects the religious sentiments of all communities and upholds the secular fabric of the Constitution.
The matter has sparked renewed debate over the balance between judicial discretion and cultural sensitivity in cases involving religious heritage sites.
These remarks have caused immense hurt and anguish to millions of followers of Sanatan Dharma,” Jindal stated, calling the comments inappropriate, insensitive, and disrespectful to the religious sentiments of countless devotees.
The incident has reignited discussions around the need for judicial sensitivity in matters involving faith and heritage, especially when dealing with petitions that touch upon deeply held beliefs.
The faith of the people of India is a profoundly sacred matter protected under Article 25 of the Constitution and demands utmost respect from all institutions, particularly the judiciary. While the responsibility for deciding the restoration of the idol lies with the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI) and other competent authorities, it was deemed unnecessary to make remarks that could be perceived as belittling or dismissive of religious sentiments.
In view of these concerns, a formal and respectful request has been made to reconsider the statements delivered in court and to withdraw them. This plea emphasizes the importance of safeguarding national religious harmony, upholding the dignity of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, and preserving India’s secular fabric.
The appeal concludes with a hope that the Hon’ble Court will demonstrate the highest standards of judicial propriety and impartiality by taking this corrective and respectful action.
