'Not justiciable': SC dismisses PIL challenging PM's ceremonial chadar offering at Ajmer Dargah
New Delhi, Jan 5
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a public interest litigation challenging the "continued state-sponsored honours, official patronage, and symbolic recognition" extended to Sufi saint Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti and the Ajmer Dargah.
Observing that the reliefs sought were not justiciable, a Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Surya Kant and Justice Joymalya Bagchi said that such issues could not be decided under Article 32 of the Constitution.
Advising the petitioners to pursue their pending civil suit, the CJI Surya Kant-led Bench clarified that the observations made by the apex court would have no bearing on the suit pending before a civil court in Ajmer regarding the alleged "unauthorised occupation of the Shankat Mochan Mahadev Temple by the Dargah".
The PIL had challenged the alleged practice of the Prime Minister and other constitutional authorities offering a ceremonial chadar at the Ajmer Dargah, terming it unconstitutional, arbitrary, and contrary to India's constitutional ethos.
The plea, filed by Jitender Singh and Vishnu Gupta, contended that there was no constitutional or statutory sanction authorising the Union government or its instrumentalities to extend official patronage to the shrine. It asserted that such practices undermine constitutional morality, secular governance, and national dignity.
According to the PIL, the practice of the Prime Minister offering a ceremonial chadar at the Ajmer Dargah began in 1947 and has continued ever since without any legal basis.
"The said practice has no legal basis and is purely religious in nature, whereas the office of the Prime Minister is a secular constitutional office representing the sovereignty, dignity, and neutrality of the Republic of India," the plea stated.
The petitioners have questioned the historical justification for extending state patronage, alleging that Moinuddin Chishti was "historically associated with foreign invasions led by Shahabuddin Ghori" during the 12th century.
The plea claimed that historical records indicate that he "actively assisted the invading forces of Shahabuddin Ghori during the assault on Ajmer", resulting in the capture and execution of Maharaja Prithviraj Chauhan.
The PIL had prayed that the apex court declare the practice of extending state-sponsored ceremonial honour and symbolic recognition to Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti and the Ajmer Dargah as unconstitutional. It had further sought directions to frame appropriate guidelines "strictly in tune with constitutional morality, secular governance and historical dignity of the nation," to prohibit such state-sponsored ceremonial glorification in future.
Meanwhile, on the occasion of the 814th Urs of Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, Union Minister for Parliamentary Affairs Kiren Rijiju, on December 22, offered a 'chadar' and flowers at the Ajmer Dargah on behalf of Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Union government. Marking the auspicious occasion, the Union Minister presented the sacred chadar at the revered shrine as a gesture of respect from the Prime Minister and the Union government. A separate chadar was also offered at the Ajmer Dargah by Lok Janshakti Party-Ram Vilas chief and Union Minister Chirag Paswan on behalf of the Central government and Prime Minister Modi.
— IANS
Reader Comments
While I respect the Court's ruling on justiciability, the petitioners raise a valid point about constitutional morality. The Prime Minister's office is secular. State patronage of specific religious shrines, however symbolic, can be seen as problematic in a diverse nation.
Ajmer Dargah is a symbol of India's composite culture. Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti's message was of peace and love. The PM offering a chadar is a beautiful tradition that sends a message of unity. We should not politicize or historicize such gestures.
The Court is right. These are matters of tradition and policy, not for judicial intervention. If we start questioning every historical figure's background, where do we stop? Focus should be on present-day harmony, not digging up contested histories from 800 years ago.
I'm glad the PIL was dismissed. This is a waste of the court's time. There are so many pressing issues like unemployment and inflation. Leaders paying respects at major shrines is part of our cultural fabric. Let it be.
The gesture is fine, but consistency is key. Do we see similar state-sponsored honors at temples, gurudwaras, or churches with the same regularity? True secularism means equal respect, not selective patronage. That's the core question here.
We welcome thoughtful discussions from our readers. Please keep comments respectful and on-topic.