38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Petition filed in the Allahabad High Court challenges the 'Sugam Darshan' System in Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple, claims it is a 'way of collecting money'

By Tmanna      08 October, 2021 04:40 PM      0 Comments
Petition filed in the Allahabad High Court challenges the 'Sugam Darshan' System in Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple, claims it is a 'way of collecting money'

A petition has been filed in Allahabad High Court challenging the 'Sugam Darshan' system, which was launched in 2018 and allows anyone to become a 'VIP' (Very Important Person) on amount of payment for the purpose of darshan' in the Shri Kashi Vishwanath Temple in Banaras, Uttar Pradesh.

It states that, "this queue-less, hassle-free Darshan system is infact nothing but a way of collecting money."

The petitioner, Gajendra Singh Yadav, a D.Phil. (Law) student at Allahabad University, states that the 'Sugam Darshan' system is not intended for Divyangs or disabled people.

He has claimed that if the Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple trust/board was willing to provide convenience for physically disabled people, there would have been no need for payment.

He further contended that this service should be provided for free to disabled people because similar facilities are provided to disabled people/divyangs in all government or public buildings, offices, and institutions, etc. 

According to the petition, 'Sugam Darshan' costs Rs. 300.00, Rudrabhishek 'Arti' costs Rs. 450-57100, Bhog costs Rs. 180-700, Rs. 3000, Shringari costs Rs. 5000, and Lakhbilwarchana costs Rs. 8660 as stated on the official website portal of Sri Kashi Vishwanath Temple trust.

The petitioner claims that, while the system of various types of darshans has been in place at Kashi Vishwanath Temple for many years, he is drawing the court's attention to a new system of Darshan that allows anyone to become a 'VIP' (Very Important Person) for a fee and discriminates against similarly situated people with less money.

As a result, he noted that, according to the temple website, if this 'Sugam Darshan' system was created for the ease and convenience of pilgrims who come for Darshan, then creating a 'Pay Darshan' option cannot be allowed. 

The petitioner has also questioned the majority of the time the barricade around the 'Shiv Linga' in the temple. He claims that the barricade is opened on occasion, but only for a short period of time, and that the majority of the time it remains intact.

According to the petitioner, because of the barricade, devotees are forced to pour water (jal), milk (doodh), and other offerings only from above the Shiv Linga without touching it. He also claims that 'Sparsh Darshan' is only available to a select few.

The petitioner has claimed that in the worship or offering of 'Lord Shiv,' 'Sparsh Darshan' is considered to be very important and also falls under the category of 'Right to Religion' under Articles 25 and 26 of the Indian Constitution.

The petitioner has also complained about the humiliation endured by devotees. He claims that those in charge of the temple's administration push devotees out shortly after entering the 'Garbha Griha' (Sanctum Santorum).

The petitioner has further sought to draw the court's attention to the current system in which no milk or sweets are permitted from outside the temple for security reasons, and point out that shops within the temple's boundaries sell milk and sweets at significantly higher prices, such as milk worth Rs. 28 for Rs. 50-60 and sweets at Rs. 400 per kg rather than the outside rate of Rs. 280 per kg.

Alleging that known persons or relatives of persons who are members of the above Trust or Temple are given preferential treatment by granting 'darshan' out of turn to them, the petitioner further stated that this is discrimination against other devotees.

CASE Gajendra Singh Yadav v. State of UP and Ors.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email