CJI’s Remarks on Vishnu Idol Case Spark Storm, Social Media Criticism Forces Clarification on Religious Respect

National News:  Chief Justice of India BR Gavai came under fire this week after his comments during a hearing on a damaged Vishnu idol in Madhya Pradesh. On Thursday, he clarified that his words were misrepresented online and asserted that he respects all religions equally. The clarification came after growing outrage on social media, where many users claimed his earlier remarks hurt religious sentiments. Several lawyers also demanded an explanation, adding pressure on the top judge to respond.

Idol Case Sparks Controversy

The controversy began when a bench led by the Chief Justice dismissed a petition seeking restoration of a seven-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari temple. The court stated that such matters fall under the jurisdiction of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI). However, the bench’s additional comments to the petitioner, suggesting he should “pray to the deity instead,” triggered widespread criticism and calls for accountability.

Social Media Reaction Unfolds

The remarks went viral across platforms, drawing sharp criticism from religious groups and individuals. Many accused the Chief Justice of making light of a sensitive religious matter. Some even demanded his removal. Social media platforms were flooded with posts, memes, and opinion pieces amplifying the controversy. The intensity of the reaction highlighted how quickly courtroom remarks can be misinterpreted and politicized in today’s digital age.

Legal Community Responds Strongly

Prominent members of the legal fraternity also weighed in. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal described social media as “an unruly horse” that cannot be controlled. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta echoed these concerns, noting that every action now faces a “disproportionate social media reaction.” Several lawyers even wrote to the Chief Justice directly, urging him to clarify and formally withdraw his remarks to restore public trust.

Courtroom Exchange Revisited

The case itself was straightforward in legal terms. The court dismissed the plea, emphasizing that the ASI is the appropriate authority to handle the restoration of ancient idols. Yet the bench’s offhand remark to the petitioner—asking him to “go pray”—was seized upon. This moment, captured and spread widely, became the flashpoint for the criticism that followed.

Judiciary and Public Perception

This incident raises larger questions about the relationship between the judiciary and public opinion. While judges often use casual language in hearings, today’s environment ensures such remarks rarely remain inside the courtroom. The backlash reflects both heightened religious sensitivities and the expanding influence of social media over public discourse. The judiciary’s reputation, once insulated, is now vulnerable to online scrutiny.

CJI’s Final Word

In response, the Chief Justice emphasized his respect for all faiths and downplayed the intent behind his earlier remark. “My words were taken out of context,” he explained during a separate hearing. While the clarification calmed some voices, the episode remains a reminder of the thin line public figures must walk in a polarized society. Going forward, courtroom remarks may be weighed more carefully given the risk of viral outrage.