The Supreme Court of India on Thursday dismissed a petition challenging the Karnataka High Court’s order upholding the state government’s decision to invite Booker Prize-winning author Banu Mushtaq to inaugurate the famed Mysuru Dasara festival at the Chamundi temple on September 22.
A bench of Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta was blunt in rejecting the plea, refusing to be drawn into arguments about religious propriety.
“Dismissed,” Justice Nath said at the very outset.
Senior Advocate P.B. Suresh, representing the petitioner, contended that a non-Hindu could not be permitted to perform pujas inside a temple.
“Puja inside a temple cannot be regarded as a secular act. It’s purely political; no reason why they should be brought inside the temple for religious activity,” he argued.
The bench was unmoved. Justice Nath repeatedly dismissed.
With the top court’s dismissal, the Karnataka government’s decision stands, clearing the way for Banu Mushtaq to inaugurate the state’s flagship cultural event this weekend.
The counsel pressed on, alleging that Mushtaq had in the past made objectionable remarks, hurting religious sentiments and therefore should not be allowed to preside. Justice Nath once again said, “dismissed.”
Finally, with a sharp observation that underlined the court’s irritation, he remarked, “We have said ‘dismissed’ three times. How many dismissals are required?”
The petition was taken up urgently after Chief Justice of India B.R. Gavai agreed to list the matter on Wednesday, given that the inauguration is scheduled for Sunday.
Karnataka High Court ruling
The petitioners had first approached the Karnataka High Court, which on September 15 rejected their plea. The High Court held that the invitation extended to Mushtaq did not infringe on any constitutional rights.
“Participation of a person practising a particular faith or religion, in celebrations of festivals of other religions does not offend the rights available under the Constitution of India,” the court had observed.
It emphasised that Mushtaq was a widely respected author, lawyer, and social activist. Her Kannada anthology, Heart Lamp, translated into English, won the International Booker Prize in May, bringing international recognition to Indian literature.
The state argued that the Dasara festivities are organised annually by the government, not by a religious body. In the past, distinguished figures from diverse walks of life, scientists, educationists, writers, freedom fighters have been invited to inaugurate the event.
A state committee comprising elected representatives and officials selected Mushtaq this year, the government said, rejecting the claim that the decision infringed upon Hindu religious practices.
The High Court agreed, noting that no religious denomination had complained of a violation of its rights. “We are unable to accept that any legal or constitutional right of the petitioners is violated by extending the invitation,” the order stated.
Why such cases arise
The litigation over Mushtaq’s invitation is not an isolated one. Courts across the country have increasingly seen challenges that pit cultural practices against constitutional principles of inclusivity and secularism.
Festivals like Mysuru Dasara have a deep religious and cultural character. Petitioners often argue that allowing non-adherents to participate in rituals undermines tradition. The courts, however, have drawn a distinction between religious rights under Articles 25 and 26 of the Constitution and state-sponsored cultural events where no community’s right is curtailed.
While the judiciary has consistently upheld the principle that state functions cannot discriminate on religious grounds, litigation often arises because social groups continue to contest the boundaries between religion and state. Courts thus become arenas where broader anxieties over identity, secularism, and political representation are played out.
In recent years, the Supreme Court has repeatedly reminded litigants that constitutional guarantees apply equally to all citizens, and participation in state-led ceremonies does not dilute religious freedoms. Thursday’s court dismissal reflects judicial impatience with attempts to convert such issues into prolonged litigation.