Subheadline: A 450-metre road-widening project for Simhastha 2028 has reached an unusual impasse, forcing officials to examine what lies beneath an eight-foot idol before deciding whether it can be moved.
Standfirst: Ujjain’s plan to widen the road between Kanthal and Gopal Mandir from nine metres to 15 metres was expected to involve the relocation of four religious structures. One Ganesha temple has already been shifted, and the structure that housed Khade Hanuman has been dismantled. But the eight-foot idol remains in place under a waterproof tent in the Bada Sarafa market. Officials say no attempt has yet been made to move it, manually or with machinery. Instead, technical teams from SGSITS Indore and an IIT are being called to assess the idol and the material beneath it. The episode reveals the limits of treating urban infrastructure as a sequence of clearances and relocations when construction intersects with living religious practice, possible heritage value and uncertain ground conditions.
Ujjain | September 10, 2026
The road-widening project in Ujjain has not stalled because the administration lacks a destination for the Khade Hanuman idol. A new location near an old water tank at Chhatri Chowk has already been identified, and preparations for a new pedestal are under way. The immediate difficulty is more basic: officials do not yet know how the idol is connected to the ground beneath it, or whether moving it could damage an older structure that may extend below the visible pedestal.
The idol stands in the Bada Sarafa market, along a 450-metre stretch between Kanthal and Gopal Mandir. The administration plans to increase the road width from nine metres to 15 metres ahead of Simhastha 2028, when Ujjain is expected to receive a major influx of pilgrims. Four religious structures are located along the stretch. Officials say all have agreed to relocate, and one Ganesha temple has already been shifted.
The temple structure that once sheltered Khade Hanuman has also been dismantled. Its boundary wall and spire were removed four days before the report, after the priest and members of local Hindu organisations gathered for a final aarti. The idol itself, however, was left untouched. That distinction is central to the dispute: the visible building has been treated as removable, while the object at its centre has become the subject of an engineering and heritage assessment.
Additional municipal commissioner Santosh Tagore said a technical team from SGSITS Indore and an IIT would be called for a proper analysis. He also said that no further action would be taken until the situation was understood. Ujjain SDM LN Garg said claims circulating on social media about repeated attempts to shift the idol were misleading. According to the administration, no attempt has so far been made to remove it, either manually or with machinery.
This response marks a change in the character of the project. A road-widening exercise normally proceeds through surveys, negotiations, demolition or relocation and construction. At the Khade Hanuman site, the sequence has been interrupted by a question that cannot be answered through municipal clearance alone: is the idol a standalone object, or is it connected to a deeper arrangement of stone beneath the surface?
Officials are examining a theory that the idol may have been installed using an old interlocking technique, in which stones beneath it were fitted tightly together. If that is the case, what appears to be an idol resting on a pedestal could be part of a larger subsurface structure. The report says a detailed ground scan may be required to determine how deep the structure extends and how it is connected to the idol. Until that assessment is completed, the proposed relocation remains a plan rather than an operational decision.
The available evidence does not establish the idol’s age or construction method. Archaeologist Raman Solanki, who visited the site as a resident and not in an official capacity, identified the stone at the rear as Malwa basalt. He said the idol could potentially be as much as 1,000 years old and possibly date to the Parmar era. Those claims remain subject to expert examination. Solanki also suggested that carefully separating stones beneath the idol might make relocation possible without extensive damage, but that possibility has not been confirmed by the technical teams being called by the administration.
That uncertainty matters because the project involves more than the removal of an obstruction from a planned road corridor. The idol remains an active focus of worship. Priest Mahesh Bairagi continues to perform morning puja among the remains of the temple, and devotees continue to queue for darshan. Members of Hindu organisations have maintained a presence at the site, while police personnel remain stationed nearby. The structure has been partly dismantled, but the social and religious use of the site has continued.
The administration’s stated position is that both objectives must be recognised. Garg said development works for Simhastha 2028 were important, but preserving Ujjain’s faith and heritage was equally significant. He said the administration would seek a consensus-based solution through dialogue with devotees, saints and experts. This language places consultation alongside technical assessment, rather than treating either as sufficient on its own.
The episode illustrates a recurring difficulty in urban infrastructure planning: a project may be geographically limited but institutionally complicated. The road section is only 450 metres long, yet its implementation involves municipal authorities, local religious representatives, devotees, technical experts, police and organisations claiming an interest in the protection of temples and idols. The administration must coordinate these actors while maintaining the project’s connection to a larger event, Simhastha 2028.
The case also shows why relocation cannot be understood only as a physical operation. A new pedestal can be prepared and a new site can be identified, but those steps do not by themselves settle questions about ritual continuity, community consent, heritage status or the physical integrity of the object being moved. The continued morning puja and the presence of devotees mean that the site remains socially active even after the temple structure has been dismantled.
For urban authorities, the immediate planning problem is therefore twofold. The first is operational: how to widen the road and prepare the corridor for the expected demands associated with Simhastha 2028. The second is procedural: how to establish, before intervention, what the idol and its foundation consist of and who must be involved in deciding its future. The administration’s decision to pause further action indicates that the second problem has become a precondition for addressing the first.
The report does not establish whether the idol will ultimately be relocated, retained at its present position or incorporated into a modified road design. It also does not establish whether the suspected subsurface structure exists, whether the idol is historically linked to the Parmar era or whether any formal heritage assessment has been completed. These are precisely the questions the technical and administrative process will have to clarify.
What is established is that Ujjain’s road-widening plan has moved beyond a conventional clearance exercise. The temple building has made way, one nearby temple has been shifted and a replacement site has been prepared. But the Khade Hanuman idol remains in place because the administration has not yet determined what lies beneath it or how relocation could affect its physical and religious significance. The next step is the promised technical assessment by SGSITS Indore and an IIT, followed by consultations with devotees, saints and other stakeholders.
