Bar objects to MP High Court Chief Justice SK Kait removing temple from official residence

The Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association has taken exception to High Court Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait removing a Hanuman Temple situated within the compound of his official residence..The bar body has written to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna seeking an inquiry into the same and action against those responsible. As per the letter to CJI, the temple located in the bungalow of the Chief Justice was a historical one and many former Chief Justices of the High Court used to pay their respects and worship there including Justices SA Bobde, AM Khanwilkar and Hemant Gupta all of whom later got elevated to the Supreme Court.The employees working at the residence of the Chief Justice used to perform puja at the temple.As per the letter, Muslim Chief Justices who served at MP like Justice Rafat Alam and Rafiq Ahmed also did not raise any objection to the temple"The said bungalow and the temple are government property, the reconstruction of that temple is also being done from time to time with government money because most of the Chief Justice and employees who believe in Sanatan Dharma have been living in the bungalow. Therefore, they do not have to waste their precious time by going far away to perform their religious worship, hence the said temple is a very important means to make life happy, peaceful and beautiful," the bar body said in its letter.Hence, the same could not have been demolished without the permission of the government or without passing any statutory order. Such an act is an insult to the believers of sanatan dharma, it was stated.This letter comes close on the heels of a complaint by lawyer who wrote to the President, the Prime Minister, the CJI and the Union Law Minister seeking action against Chief Justice Kait over the same issue. As per the complaint by advocate Ravindra Nath Tripathi, the temple had remained in the compound for a long time - even when the said bungalow was occupied by a Muslim Chief Justice - before Justice Kait got it demolished."It is pertinent to mention that it is not his personal property, and he should not have done this," the complaint said.According to the complaint, another lawyer has now taken inspiration from the act of the Chief Justice and has moved a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking removal of all temples from police stations across the State. .Apprehensive that Justice Kait might order removal of the temples, Tripathi too has sought an inquiry against the judge, as well as criminal action and transfer of the judge.He has also sought Justice Kait's recusal from hearing the PIL seeking removal of temples from police stations..Speaking to Bar and Bench, Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association President Dhanya Kumar Jain stated that he was informed Justice Kait had gotten the temple removed though earlier Chief Justices had not taken objection to the same. "Justice Bobde rahein hai wahan, Justice Khanwilkar rahein hai, Patnaik rahein hai, yeh sarein judges ka adovcate batayein hai pooja hoti thi, yeh ek chota sa mandir hai - sab pooja karte the. lekin ab bataya jaraha hai ki Justice Kait ne use hatwa diya hai (Justice Bobde stayed there, Justice Khanwilkar stayed there, Justice Patnaik stayed there—advocates have said that prayers were conducted there. It is a small temple where everyone used to pray. But now it is being said that Justice Kait had it removed.)"He further suggested that the possible reason for Justice Kait removing the temple could be his adherence to Buddhism.Lekin yeh toh official residence hai. Yeh toh badi baat hogai aur ispe investigation honi chahiey...achi baat hai ki judge Buddha ko follow karte hai...hume koi dikkat nhi lekin aese mandir hatana sahi nahi agar aesa hua hai toh (But this is an official residence. This is a serious matter and should be investigated. It’s good that the judge follows Buddhism. We have no issue with that. But removing a temple like this is not right if it indeed happened.).[Read MP Bar Association Letter].[Read Lawyer's Complaint]