‘I respect all religions’: CJI Gavai on backlash over his ‘ask your deity’ remark – What’s Khajuraho case | India News

CJI BR Gavai (File Photo)

NEW DELHI: Reacting to the social media backlash over his “go ask your deity” remark, Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai on Thursday mentioned: “I respect all religions”.On CJI Gavai’s remark, Solicitor General G Tushar Mehta, in response to Bar & Bench, mentioned: “We have seen this… There is Newton’s law, which says every action has an equal reaction, but now every action has a disproportionate social media reaction, Milord.“The CJI-led bench on Tuesday dismissed a plea in search of instructions to reconstruct and reinstall a seven-foot idol of Lord Vishnu on the Javari Temple, which is a part of the Unesco World Heritage Khajuraho temple advanced in Madhya Pradesh. The CJI Justice BR Gavai-led bench referred to as the plea a “publicity interest litigation”. “This is purely publicity interest litigation… 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,” the CJI was quoted as saying by information company PTI.Chief Justice BR Gavai, heading a bench with Justice Ok Vinod Chandran, refused to entertain a plea from Rakesh Dalal calling for the set up and consecration of a brand new idol on the broken Javari Temple in Chhatarpur district.The counsel for the petitioner mentioned the idol’s head was dilapidated and urged the courtroom to intervene to permit its reconstruction.The bench mentioned the difficulty squarely fell beneath the jurisdiction of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI).“It’s an archaeological find, whether the ASI would permit such a thing to be done or not… there are various issues,” the CJI mentioned.The CJI added, “In the meantime, if you are not averse to Shaivism, you can go and worship there… there is a very big linga of Shiva, one of the biggest in Khajuraho.”Dalal’s petition sought instructions for the alternative or reconstruction of the idol, arguing a number of representations had been made to the central house ministry and the ASI.