The Bombay High Court has cleared the Shri Vitthal Rukmini Mandir Samiti to perform a protective chemical coating on the ancient idols of Lord Vitthal and Goddess Rukmini at Pandharpur in Solapur district, dismissing a legal challenge by local priests and devotees who sought to compel traditional preservation methods.
In an order issued on August 7, Justice Shailesh P. Brahme ruled that the petitioners failed to produce scientific evidence or cite specific scriptural guidelines from the shastras or agamas to justify stopping the protective process. The court observed that stone deterioration is an ongoing issue and that maintaining the idols requires a continuous, scientifically backed conservation approach.
Statutory Authority And Expert Recommendations
Dismissing claims that the temple managing committee lacked legal authority under the Pandharpur Temples Act, 1973, the High Court held that protecting and preserving the deities falls directly within the statutory duties of the trust. The court noted that the conservation plan was backed by a December 19, 2025 expert report from the deputy superintendent archaeological chemist of Aurangabad.
Appearing for the temple committee, Senior Advocate Prasad Dhakephalkar pointed out that chemical treatment had been successfully applied to the idols on four previous occasions based on scientific guidance without prior objection from the petitioners. He asserted that the trust was bound by law to take necessary preventative measures against erosion.
Reversal Of Lower Court Findings
The decision resolves a dispute that previously saw conflicting rulings in lower courts. On June 22, 2026, a trial court had issued an interim injunction halting the chemical work, reasoning that the idols were in a good state of conservation and faced no immediate danger. An appellate court set aside that injunction on July 17, 2026, leading the petitioners to approach the High Court.
Justice Brahme rejected the trial court’s assessment as erroneous and unfounded, stating that trial courts do not possess the specialized expertise needed to evaluate idol conservation.
Petitioners Arguments Dismissed As Unfounded
Advocates Dnyaneshwari S. Utpat and Shantanu Gurav, representing the petitioning devotees and temple priests, argued that the proposed chemical application was arbitrary, lacked transparency, and was unauthorized under the 1973 Act. They urged the court to mandate the traditional “vajralep” method of stone coating and expressed concern that chemical application would result in defilement.
The High Court rejected those contentions, describing the petition as an unsubstantiated inquiry based on misplaced apprehensions. The court emphasized that scientific preservation efforts to safeguard the structural integrity of the deities are fully compatible with their religious sanctity.
