New Delhi: In a pragmatic ruling regarding the administration of religious institutions, the Supreme Court on Tuesday refused to entertain a plea challenging the practice of providing "VIP Darshan" at the famous Shri Mahakaleshwar Temple in Ujjain. The Court observed that deciding who enters the sanctum sanctorum (Garbhagriha) is an administrative matter, not a judicial one.
The Bench, comprising Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, Justice R. Mahadevan, and Justice Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing a petition filed by Darpan Awasthi, represented by Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain. The plea sought a ban on the preferential treatment given to VIPs—often allowed entry into the innermost sanctum to offer water to the deity—while common devotees are denied such access.
The petitioner argued that the practice violates Article 14 (Right to Equality), creating two classes of devotees based on status. Jain contended that there should be a uniform policy: either everyone gets access, or no one does.
However, the Chief Justice expressed strong reservations about the judiciary stepping into the shoes of temple management.
"Whether it should be allowed or not, it's not for the Court to decide... Let those who are at the helm of affairs take a decision. If Courts start regulating who should be allowed to enter... it's too much for the Courts."
CJI Surya Kant further remarked that applying constitutional fundamental rights inside a temple's sanctum could lead to a slippery slope.
"First you say I have a right to enter because so and so is entering, then you say I have the right to chant mantras here because I have right to speech... so all fundamental rights will be there inside the sanctum sanctorum."
The Court implied that religious rituals and management protocols cannot always be tested strictly against the touchstone of constitutional rights applicable in public spaces.
The Madhya Pradesh High Court had earlier dismissed the petition, noting that the "VIP" status is not defined by statute but is a discretion exercised by the Collector and the Temple Management Committee based on protocol and security. The Supreme Court upheld this view, allowing the petitioner to withdraw the plea and submit a representation to the temple authorities instead.
This order reflects the Supreme Court's "hands-off" approach to the day-to-day management of religious places. While the debate on "VIP Culture" in temples resonates with the public, the Court has drawn a line: questions of queue management, specific rituals, and entry protocols remain the domain of the executive and temple trusts, not the judiciary.