Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court
Suresh Kumar Kait (born 24 May 1963) is an Indian Judge. Presently, he is serving as Chief Justice of the Madhya Pradesh High Court.[1] He is a former judge of the Delhi High Court.[2]
Controversies
Temple demolition controversy
In December 2024, a controversy erupted over Madhya Pradesh High Court Chief Justice Suresh Kait's decision to remove a historical temple from his official residence. The temple, which had been a place of worship for many former Chief Justices, including Justices SA Bobde, AM Khanwilkar, and Hemant Gupta, was demolished without government permission or a statutory order. The Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association addressed a letter to Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Supreme Court Judge Justice B.R. Gavai, seeking an inquiry and action against those responsible.[3]
The bar body emphasized that the temple was government property and had been maintained with government funds. They argued that the temple's removal was an insult to believers of Sanatan Dharma, as even Muslim Chief Justices like Justice Rafat Alam and Rafiq Ahmed had not objected to its presence. The controversy intensified when advocate Ravindra Nath Tripathi filed a complaint to the President, Prime Minister, CJI, and Union Law Minister, seeking action against Justice Kait. Tripathi also requested Justice Kait's recusal from hearing a public interest litigation (PIL) seeking the removal of temples from police stations across the state. Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association President Dhanya Kumar Jain suggested that Justice Kait's adherence to Buddhism, which traditionally does not endorse the presence of Hindu temples, might have influenced his decision to remove the temple. Jain called for an investigation into the matter, stating that the removal of the temple from an official residence was a serious issue. The controversy has sparked significant debate and calls for accountability within the legal community, creating an environment of sadness and anger among the Advocates' Association, legal fraternity, and the general public.[4][5][6]
References