In a recent development, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court directed the authorities in Virudhunagar district to return the Bharat Mata (Mother India) statue, which had been removed from the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) office in Kottaipatti village on August 7, 2023. The court’s decision came on November 13, in response to the statue’s removal, which was deemed unlawful by the BJP.
According to reports, a team led by Aruppukottai Revenue Divisional Officer (RDO) Sivakumar and Tehsildar Baskaran entered the BJP office premises in the early hours of August 7 and removed the statue, claiming it had been installed without official permission. The team forcibly opened the office gate in Virudhunagar district, responding to a complaint about the unauthorized placement of the statue.
The High Court’s ruling now mandates the return of the statue to its original location, marking a significant order against the district authorities’ previous actions.
Authorities had questioned the statue’s installation, claiming it lacked the necessary permissions. Footage circulated on social media showed a police officer scaling the wall of the BJP office to unlock the gate from the inside, allowing officials to enter and remove the statue.
BJP state president Annamalai condemned the authorities’ actions, calling them “unacceptable” and blaming the DMK government. He expressed dismay over the situation, asserting that “under the corrupt DMK regime in Tamil Nadu, there is no freedom to install a Bharat Mata statue, even on party-owned private property.”
Following a petition by Virudhunagar BJP District President G. Pandurangan, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has directed district authorities to return the Bharat Mata statue to the BJP office in Kottaipatti village and to refrain from interfering with the party’s right to install the statue on its private premises.
Hearing the case, Justice N. Anand Venkatesh emphasised that while installing statues on public property requires state approval, such regulations do not extend to private spaces, such as homes or office premises. He stated, “No legislature or executive should assume any authority to interfere with the private affairs of a citizen or association. It is not the role of the State and its officers to control or regulate what occurs within a citizen’s private domain. Such interference is constitutionally forbidden.”
The Madras High Court’s single bench criticized the Virudhunagar district authorities for removing the Bharat Mata statue from BJP’s private office property, describing the action as “high-handed” and likely influenced by external pressure. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh, delivering the order under Article 226 of the Constitution, stated, “Such high-handedness can never be tolerated by a Constitutional Court… we live in a welfare state governed by the rule of law, and this conduct is highly condemnable and should never be repeated in the future.”
The Court remarked that placing a Bharat Mata statue within one’s garden or home is comparable to creating a personal shrine, representing “hope, unity, and respect for the motherland.” The statue, the Court noted, symbolises the ideals of freedom, resilience, and cultural identity, inviting reflection on these values.
The BJP argued that the statue had been installed within its office premises as a representation of national unity and alleged that it was illegally removed by the Tamil Nadu ruling party with police assistance.
Responding to the BJP’s stance, Tamil Nadu district authorities pointed to state guidelines issued in 2022, which prohibit the installation of new statues of any leader and require proper maintenance of existing statues. These guidelines also advise that statues likely to cause unrest should be relocated, and reference a 2017 government order mandating prior government approval for any new statue installations.
The single-judge bench, however, disagreed with the DMK government’s interpretation. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh remarked, “No reasonable person could argue that expressing patriotism and love for one’s country threatens the interests of the State or the community. In fact, the opposite is true, as the Constitution mandates citizens to uphold such values as part of their Fundamental Duties under Article 51-A.”
In a significant ruling, the Madras High Court upheld the right to install a Bharat Mata statue on private property, stating that such an act is a personal and symbolic expression of reverence for one’s motherland. Justice N. Anand Venkatesh observed, “The installation of a Bharat Mata statue on private property reflects an individual’s reverence for their motherland. While it is crucial to respect local laws and community sentiments, honoring Bharat Mata is fundamentally an expression of love and pride, serving as a reminder of the values and sacrifices tied to one’s heritage.”
— Raama Sreenivasan (@ProfessorBJP) November 13, 2024
Welcoming the court’s decision, Tamil Nadu BJP State General Secretary Prof. Rama Srinivasan tweeted that this ruling marks a historic moment for the party and its supporters.
