Supreme Court to Hear Challenge in Kapaleeswarar Temple Peacock Idol Case on September 2
The Supreme Court will hear on September 2 a petition challenging the Madras High Court’s decision to quash the FIR in the 2004 Kapaleeswarar Temple peacock idol case involving industrialist Venu Srinivasan.

Supreme Court to Hear Challenge in Kapaleeswarar Temple Peacock Idol Case on September 2
The Supreme Court is set to hear on September 2 a challenge against the Madras High Court’s decision to quash an FIR linked to the alleged replacement of a peacock idol at Chennai’s historic Kapaleeswarar Temple during renovation work in 2004.
The petition has been filed by temple activist Rangarajan Narasimhan against industrialist Venu Srinivasan and another respondent. The matter is listed as Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 7650/2024 in the Supreme Court’s advance list and is part of a group of connected cases scheduled for consideration.
The dispute dates back to renovation work carried out at the Sri Kapaleeswarar Temple in Mylapore, Chennai, in 2004. Allegations were later raised that an antique peacock idol associated with the temple had been replaced during the renovation without the required authorisation.
At the time, Venu Srinivasan was associated with a government-appointed committee involved in the temple renovation process. Narasimhan alleged that the original idol had been removed and replaced unlawfully.
Following the allegations, an FIR was registered and the Tamil Nadu Idol Wing investigated the matter. A final report was subsequently filed naming Srinivasan and others in connection with the case.
Srinivasan has denied involvement in any alleged theft or unauthorised replacement of the idol. He had also secured anticipatory bail during the earlier proceedings.
In February 2024, the Madras High Court quashed the FIR. Narasimhan subsequently approached the Supreme Court, challenging the High Court’s order.
The apex court’s September 2 hearing will focus on the challenge to the FIR’s quashing. The proceedings could determine whether the Madras High Court’s decision remains in force or whether the case faces further legal scrutiny.
Tags
More Stories

India Raises China Business Visa Hurdles as Firms Face Travel Disruptions
8 Sept 2026

Vadodara-Ratlam Rail Expansion: Two New Lines Planned, Vishwamitri-Dabhoi to Get Double Track
7 Sept 2026

Bengaluru-Vijayawada Highway: New 343-Km Corridor to Cut Journey by 110 Km
7 Sept 2026

'Trapped Students Making Phone Calls': BJP MLA on Delhi Building Collapse in Satya Niketan
6 Sept 2026
