New Delhi: Chief Justice of India (CJI) BR Gavai on Thursday, September 18, issued a clarification in open court regarding his earlier remarks made during the Supreme Court’s hearing on the Khajuraho idol restoration case.

Addressing the backlash and controversy surrounding his comments, the CJI said his words had been “misrepresented” and “taken out of context” on social media. “Someone told me the other day that the comments I made were mis-portrayed on social media. I respect all religions,” Justice Gavai stated while clarifying his position in court.

The controversy stems from a Supreme Court order on September 16 dismissing a plea that sought the reinstallation of a seven-foot idol of Lord Vishnu at the Javari Temple, part of the UNESCO World Heritage-listed Khajuraho group of monuments in Madhya Pradesh.

During the hearing, CJI Gavai described the petition as “purely publicity interest litigation” and suggested that the petitioner’s grievance was more of a matter of faith than of law. “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,” he remarked during the proceedings.

The bench further noted that the matter fell within the jurisdiction of the Archaeological Survey of India (ASI), which has the authority to decide whether the idol could be reinstalled. “It’s an archaeological find, whether the ASI would permit such a thing to be done or not. There are various issues,” CJI Gavai observed, pointing out the complexity of the request.

Adding to the controversy, the Chief Justice had also commented on the presence of other temples within the Khajuraho complex, saying, “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.” This additional remark sparked criticism from some religious groups and individuals, who accused the CJI of being dismissive of the petitioner’s faith.

Following the social media backlash, Justice Gavai’s clarification sought to put an end to the debate, reaffirming that the judiciary respects all religious beliefs and that his earlier statements were not intended to offend any community.

The petitioner, whose plea was dismissed, has not made any further public comment following the clarification.