The Indian Supreme Court refused to entertain a writ petition seeking transfer of control of the Mahabodhi Mahavihara in Bodh Gaya to the Buddhist community by June 30, 2025. Instead the Court gave the petitioner the liberty to move the High Court for appropriate relief.
The petition challenges the validity of the Bodh Gaya Temple Act, 1949, under which the Mahabodhi Temple is currently managed. The Act provides for a management committee comprising four Buddhists, four Hindus and the District Collector of Gaya as chairman.
Read also: Supreme Court to Hear Plea Against Maratha Reservation in July
A two-judge bench of Justices M.M. Sundresh and K. Vinod Chandran heard the case and declined to exercise jurisdiction under Article 32 of the Constitution.
The bench said, "We are not inclined to entertain the plea under Article 32, however, the petitioner is free to approach the High Court."
The petition was filed by advocate and former minister of state Sulekha Kumbhare. She argued that the present structure of management of the temple violates the fundamental rights of Buddhists guaranteed under Articles 25 (freedom of religion), 26 (freedom to manage religious affairs) and 29 (protection of cultural rights) of the Indian Constitution.
Read also: NEET-PG 2024: Petition in Supreme Court Against Conversion of Chandigarh UT Quota to All India
According to them, handing over the full control of the Mahabodhi Temple to Buddhists was necessary to preserve their religious autonomy and identity.
The Mahabodhi Mahavihara located in Bodh Gaya, Bihar is one of the most revered sites of Buddhism. It is believed to be the place where Gautam Buddha attained enlightenment. Recognised as a World Heritage Site by UNESCO, the temple attracts global attention and religious reverence.
While the Supreme Court dismissed the plea at this stage, it provided the petitioner with a clear path to seek remedy before the appropriate High Court.
Read also: Supreme Court Refuses to Grant Bail to PFI Leader AS Ismail on Medical Grounds, Seeks Report on
"The petitioner may seek her remedy before the High Court having the appropriate jurisdiction," the bench said.
The judgment maintains the status quo of the present joint management structure of the temple and reiterates the Court's view on the proper use of Article 32 for constitutional remedies.
Case Details: SULEKHATAI NALINITAI NARAYANRAO KUMBHARE Vs THE UNION OF INDIA| D No. 19102/2025
