Premium

‘In Mahakal’s presence, nobody is VIP’: SC declines to entertain appeal challenging Madhya Pradesh HC against ‘VIP darshan’ at Ujjain Mahakaleshwar Temple

The Supreme Court said that the petitioner should approach the relevant authority over the issue of 'VIP darshan' at Ujjain's Mahakaleshwar Temple.

3 min readJan 27, 2026 03:07 PM IST

Appearing for the appellant, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain said that an RTI inquiry had revealed that only VIPs would be given entrance to the garbhagriha.

While refusing to entertain a plea challenging permission to VIPs to enter the “garbhagriha” (sanctum sanctorum) of Shri Mahakaleshwar Temple in Madhya Pradesh’s Ujjain, the Supreme Court said Tuesday “in the presence of Mahakal, nobody is VIP,” but added that it is not for the courts to decide who should enter the temple.

The three-judge bench, presided by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant and also comprising Justices R Mahadevan and Joymalya Bagchi, was hearing an appeal against the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissing a petition challenging the VIP entry to the sanctum sanctorum of Mahakaleshwar Temple.

“Whether it should be (allowed) or not be is not something the courts should decide… Ideally, it may be, but for that, let those who are in the helm of affairs make a decision, not the courts. If the courts start regulating who should be allowed to enter the temple and who should not be, it will be too much for the courts also,” Chief Justice of India Surya Kant said.

Appearing for the appellant, Advocate Vishnu Shankar Jain said that an RTI inquiry had revealed that only VIPs would be given entrance to the garbhagriha.

CJI Surya Kant expressed displeasure over the plea, and said, “A person who files this kind of petition is not a shradhalu (devotee). They don’t go there. We don’t want to comment further. These people go for different purposes.”

Jain said the petitioner is concerned with equal treatment for entry into the “garbhagriha”. “This is in violation of Article 14,” he submitted.

“So far as entry into the garbhagriha is concerned, there should be a uniform policy. Whether a person is allowed entry into the garbhagriha or not allowed, it should be on the basis of a particular guideline or on the basis of a uniform policy,” Jain contended.

Story continues below this ad

“Citizens cannot be discriminated against or differentiated on the basis of VIPs. If a person is entering a garbhagriha, it is on the recommendation of a collector, a devotee who is also visiting Mahakal, he should also have the right to enter the garbhagriha, and offer water to the deity.”

CJI Surya Kant said that if arguments are going to be raised on Articles 14 and 15 and rights, etc, “they better don’t go.” “First, you will say I have a right to enter because so and so is entering, then you say I have now the right to chant mantras here, because I have the right to speech. So all fundamental rights will be there inside the sanctum sanctorum…”

Jain reiterated that his only issue is discrimination and that there should either be a complete prohibition or none at all. However, CJI Surya Kant said that the petitioner should approach the relevant authority. “Go and tell the authority.”

The bench went on to dispose of the plea, and said in the order, “The petitioner seeks and is permitted to withdraw the petition and is at liberty to give his suggestions/ recommendations to the competent authority”.