Maharashtra Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis has publicly defended former Chief Justice of India (CJI) B.R. Gavai, who is facing criticism for meeting with Dhirendra Shastri, the head priest of Bageshwar Dham in Madhya Pradesh. The controversy erupted after activist Shyam Manav stated that Justice Gavai, by bowing before Shastri, had forfeited his right to invoke the name of Dr. B.R. Ambedkar.
Fadnavis dismissed Manav’s criticism, questioning his authority to issue such judgments and characterizing his statements as attention-seeking. “Who is Shyam Manav to say this? Who gave him this right? Is he the one distributing certificates? Lately, Shyam Manav speaks only for publicity. Since no one pays attention to him, he makes such statements daily to stay in the news,” Fadnavis remarked, as reported by the Indian Express.
The incident gained traction after Shyam Manav, founder-president of the Andhashraddha Nirmulan Samiti (Anti-Superstition Committee), criticized Justice Gavai’s interaction with Dhirendra Shastri. Manav expressed shock, stating that a person holding a position like a justice should not bow before a spiritual leader if they claim to follow Ambedkarite ideology. Manav further challenged Shastri to prove his purported divine powers by accepting a prize offered by his organization, a challenge that has been posed previously.
Dhirendra Shastri, also known as ‘Baba Bageshwar Dham,’ has been a subject of controversy himself. His remarks concerning historical figures and his claims of possessing supernatural abilities have drawn scrutiny from rationalist groups and legal experts. Activists like Manav have previously challenged Shastri to demonstrate his purported powers under scientific or verifiable conditions, often offering substantial monetary rewards for such proof.
The meeting between Justice Gavai and Shastri has also drawn commentary from legal and political figures. Senior advocate Prashant Bhushan raised concerns about the implications of a Supreme Court judge meeting with a controversial religious figure, suggesting it could undermine the judiciary’s impartiality. Conversely, supporters argue that judges, like all citizens, have a right to personal faith and to engage with religious leaders.
Justice Gavai, a former Chief Justice of India, has a background associated with Ambedkarite politics through his father, R.S. Gavai. Critics have questioned how this background aligns with meeting a religious leader like Shastri, who has faced accusations of spreading superstition and making divisive statements. Supporters, however, emphasize that judges are individuals with personal beliefs and that attending religious gatherings does not necessarily compromise their judicial conduct.
The debate highlights a broader discussion in India about the separation of religion and public life, particularly concerning the judiciary. While the Indian Constitution upholds secularism, the personal beliefs and public actions of judges often become subjects of public discourse, especially when they intersect with controversial figures or events. The interaction between Justice Gavai and Dhirendra Shastri has thus reignited conversations about judicial ethics, personal faith, and the perceived influence of religious leaders in public spheres.
The Chenab Times News Desk