Townhall Times — For the past several days, there has been a wave of disrespect toward the Chief Justice of India (CJI) on social media. He has been labeled as “anti-Sanatana” and “anti-national” following his remarks during a recent judgment.
The case in question was heard by a Supreme Court bench comprising CJI Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K. Vinod Chandran. Advocate Sanjay Nool represented the petitioner. The bench termed the petition as “purely a publicity interest litigation.” CJI Gavai remarked that the matter falls under the jurisdiction of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), and judicial intervention from the Supreme Court is not appropriate.
Key remarks made by the bench included:
-
“This is purely a publicity-interest petition… If you are a true devotee of Lord Vishnu, go and ask the Lord himself to intervene. Pray and meditate.”
-
“This is an archaeological matter. There are several issues regarding what the ASI would permit.”
-
“Meanwhile, if you are not averse to Shaivism, you can go and worship there… Khajuraho has one of the largest Shiva lingams.”
This is not the first time the Supreme Court has made strong comments on frivolous petitions. In several earlier cases, the apex court has imposed fines on petitioners. However, petitioners still have legal options — to take the matter to a larger bench or file a formal complaint against a judge through appropriate legal channels. What cannot be allowed, however, are public insults and defamatory statements against judges.
In this case, self-proclaimed spiritual leader Aniruddhacharya crossed all limits. He directly insulted the Chief Justice, saying:
“If you can’t do anything, then are you just sitting there to eat bread? Should I ask Lord Narasimha to tear open your chest?”
In a separate incident in September 2025, during an event in Ayodhya, Jagadguru Rambhadracharya labeled Dr. B.R. Ambedkar as a “traitor”, claiming that he supported British interests and opposed Manusmriti in the Constitution. The statement went viral and sparked widespread outrage among Dalit organizations. Chandrashekhar Azad condemned Rambhadracharya, calling him “anti-Constitution” and unworthy of being considered a saint. He asserted that anyone who opposes the Constitution does not deserve to be in this country.
Around the same time, BJP MLA Shyam Prakash made a controversial remark: “Even gods feared women,” although it wasn’t directly related to Ambedkar. Opposition parties demanded police action, but no steps have been taken so far.
In July-August 2025, Vrindavan-based saint Premanand Maharaj made a derogatory statement about women, claiming that “Only 2-4 out of 100 girls are pure; the rest have multiple boyfriends.” This video went viral, and the National Commission for Women took suo motu cognizance of the matter.
Similarly, Aniruddhacharya has also attacked women, calling them “adulterous”, which is seen by many as a direct assault on the values of Sanatana Dharma. Swami Prabodhanand condemned him, stating that saints must apologize for using such disgraceful language.
Now, Advocate Harsh Gautam demands that Aniruddhacharya and other such so-called religious figures be prosecuted under the following legal provisions:
-
Section 499 and 500 – Defamation
-
Section 153A – Promoting enmity between groups
-
Section 295A – Deliberate insult of religious beliefs
-
Section 505 – Statements conducing to public mischief
-
Section 124A – Sedition (if applicable)
-
Section 228 – Insult or interruption to a public servant during judicial proceedings
-
SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 3(1)(x) – Caste-based insult (if applicable)
-
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – Section 2 – Criminal contempt of court
Leave a Reply