Supreme Court seeks govt response to Netaji’s daughter plea for return of his ‘ashes’ from Tokyo temple

“Let (the) Union reply. Issue notice,” the court said.

The plea filed through Advocate Ritika Vohra said the “Union of India’s prolonged failure to take a final, reasoned and time-bound decision to repatriate (or at least facilitate repatriation) to India the mortal remains/ashes attributed to Netaji Subhas Chandra Bose, preserved at Renko-Ji Temple, Tokyo, Japan” is a “continuing constitutional wrong”.

It said bringing the remains back would enable Pfaff to “perform (Netaji’s)  final rites in India with dignity and finality”.

The plea submitted that “Netaji’s remains were supposed to be kept at Renko-Ji Temple for a few months” but have remained there for over 80 years — preserved and honoured by successive head priests — forming a continuing state of affairs of “posthumous exile and non-closure for Netaji’s now late wife – Ms. Emilie Schenkl – and daughter Professor Anita B. Pfaff…”

“Notably Indian visitors and delegations, inter alia. Late Shri Rajendra Prasad, former President of India; Late Shri Jawahar Lai Nehru, former Prime Minister of India; Late Smt. Indira Gandhi, former Prime Minister of India; Late Shri Atal Bihari Vajpayee, former Prime Minister of India; and Late Shri Pranab Mukherjee, former President of India have paid respects at the Renko-Ji Temple on the accepted belief and understanding that the remains are those of Netaji. This is relevant to demonstrate long-standing State knowledge and engagement and the continuing nature of the issue,” the plea stated.

Pfaff said her petition “is…not about the cause of Netaji’s death but only carriage of his mortal remains back to his country” and also that “there is no evidential dispute or dissent regarding the factum that the ashes at Renko-Ji Temple are that of Netaji’s”.

The plea said its “gravamen is not to re-litigate these historical conclusions. The petition in fact pleads that the State has still not translated its admitted stance that the remains at Renko-Ji Temple are that of Netaji’s into decisive constitutional action to ensure dignified final disposal and closure, with the mortal remains attributed to Netaji being repatriated to India”.

Earlier on March 12, the Supreme Court had declined to entertain a similar plea by Ashis Ray, Netaji’s grandnephew, saying Pfaff should “step forward” and file a petition herself.

Pfaff, 84, then appeared before the bench via videoconferencing from Austria.

“We make it very clear, we respect their sentiments and we would ensure her sentiments are translated into legal action. But she must step forward,” the bench had told Singhvi, who also appeared for Ray that day.

“Because there are differences, to our knowledge, in the family itself with regard to the incidents which occurred,” Justice Bagchi had said.

Though Singhvi submitted that Ray’s petition had the support of Pfaff, who is Netaji’s sole heir, Justice Bagchi had said, “let the heir come before us. It cannot be a fight behind the clouds. If the heir wants the ashes… to be brought back to the country, the heir must come before us”.

The CJI pointed out then that petitions regarding Netaji had come before the Supreme Court earlier too and they were dismissed. “How many times will this issue come to the Supreme Court,” he asked.

In November 2024, the Supreme Court rejected a petition filed by a Cuttack resident who sought an inquiry into Netaji’s death. The court told him that the issue did not fall within the domain of judicial review.

With the court not inclined to entertain the March 12 plea, Singhvi had sought permission to withdraw it, with the liberty to return with a fresh petition, and the bench allowed this.