New Delhi: The Shivaji Maharaj statue case has taken a new turn after the Supreme Court refused to interfere with the Bombay High Court’s order directing the removal of a Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj statue from land owned by the Mormugao Port Authority (MPA) in Goa. The petition challenging the High Court’s decision was withdrawn after the Supreme Court indicated that it was not inclined to interfere.
Shivaji Maharaj Statue Row: What Did the Supreme Court Decide
A partial working-days Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Sheel Nagu heard the petition challenging the Bombay High Court’s order. During the hearing, the Bench showed that it was not willing to interfere with the High Court’s decision.
Read also: Supreme Court on Per Incuriam: 4 Situations Where a Judgment May Not Be Binding
Following this, the petitioners withdrew their plea. The Supreme Court dismissed the case as withdrawn but allowed the petitioners to approach the Bombay High Court if they wanted to seek any change or clarification in its earlier order.
Why Was the Statue Ordered to Be Removed
Earlier, the Bombay High Court at Goa directed that the Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj statue be removed from land belonging to the Mormugao Port Authority. The High Court said the statue had been installed in gross violation of local laws and that the construction on the port land was illegal.
Shivaji Maharaj Statue Row: High Court Criticised the Goa Government
The High Court strongly criticised the Goa Government for not acting despite repeated complaints. The Bench observed that the State had behaved like a “mere bystander” even though government agencies were responsible for maintaining law and order.
The judges also expressed concern that public property belonging to a major port had been encroached upon without effective action from the authorities.
What Did the Port Authority Tell the Court
According to the Mormugao Port Authority, several complaints had been made to the Bogda Police Station and other authorities. The authority alleged that local persons forcibly entered the port land and installed the statue. It also claimed that despite repeated requests, authorities failed to prevent the alleged encroachment.
Shivaji Maharaj Statue Row: High Court’s Observations
The High Court noted that if such an incident could happen on land protected by a major port, it raised serious concerns about law enforcement. The court rejected the argument that only the Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) was responsible for protecting the property. It said maintaining law and order remains the responsibility of the State and its agencies.
Read also: Justice Gautam Patel Threat Case: Bombay High Court Seals Mumbai Police and MEA Probe Reports
