Taj of cards: NBDSA directs Aaj Tak to edit Sudhir Chaudhary’s ‘history lesson’ on ‘Tejo Mahalay’

The News Broadcasting & Digital Standards Authority (NBDSA) has directed Aaj Tak to edit a broadcast in which its former anchor, Sudhir Chaudhary, amplified claims that the Taj Mahal was originally a Hindu Shiva temple, reversing its earlier decision that found no violation of broadcasting norms.

NBDSA chairperson Justice AK Sikri (Retd.) passed this order on May 28, following a review application filed by the complainant, Indrajeet Ghorpade, against the episode that aired on November 29, 2024.

The complaint

Ghorpade had originally filed his complaint in December 2024, arguing that the broadcast presented a one-sided historical narrative focused solely on the alleged destruction of Hindu temples by Muslim rulers. 

Most critically, he pointed out that Chaudhary had amplified the claim that the Taj Mahal was once a Hindu Shiva temple (originally called “Tejo Mahalay”), a claim the Archaeological Survey of India has explicitly rejected. The order notes that Ghorpade had argued the anchor “further amplified the baseless claim that the Taj Mahal was once a Hindu temple, ignoring the Archaeological Survey of India's (ASI) clarification that the Taj Mahal is a tomb and was not built on a Hindu temple.” He pointed out that India Today’s own 2018 report had debunked this exact claim under the headline: “Taj Mahal is a tomb, not a Shiva temple: ASI.”

The complainant further argued that the broadcast's overall tone carried what he described as “thinly veiled dog whistles against the Muslim community” while arguing that the narrative “appeared to connect the actions of Muslim rulers from centuries ago with the Muslim community in contemporary India, fostering division.”

The channel's response

Aaj Tak defended the broadcast, arguing it was presented in a documentary style as a “post-mortem” or historical analysis, drawing on sources such as ASI reports and published books. The channel maintained it was merely presenting claims made by third parties, not endorsing them, and that the broadcast served the public interest by encouraging historical understanding.

In its written response, the channel was dismissive of the complaint itself. It argued that the complainant’s own admission that he “cannot independently verify all the claims made in the report regarding Muslim places of worship allegedly being Hindu or Jain temples” undermined his objections, and that his complaint had “notably failed to cite any sources” by which the anchor’s cited sources “can be rebutted, let alone challenged.” 

The channel further argued that characterising a contrary historical interpretation as propaganda against a community was “not only unreasonable but also detrimental to the country's peaceful political and religious environment." It also denied any violation of NBDSA’s Code of Ethics, asserting the broadcast was televised “with journalistic objectivity and in good faith for the public good.”

Specifically, the channel cited articles from Voice of America and Bar and Bench, and historian Stephen Knapp’s website, as sources for the third-party claims presented in the broadcast.

NBDSA’s reversal

NBDSA originally found, in December 2025, no violation of its Code of Conduct because  “the intent of the broadcast was not to convey that the present structures should be destroyed, rather the broadcast aimed to educate the masses about the history of the temples in India and what happened to them.” But after Ghorpade filed a review application and a hearing was held on March 12, 2026, the authority reconsidered.

In its revised order, NBDSA found that the broadcaster had engaged in selective reliance on official records across different segments of the programme. While Aaj Tak had “relied on the Archaeological Survey of India’s report when covering claims about the Qutub Minar, it omitted similar official records when reporting on the Taj Mahal.” 

The authority noted this inconsistency was particularly difficult to justify, as it “raises[the] issue as to why Taj Mahal was included in the impugned broadcast, particularly in view of the broadcaster’s own admitted earlier reportage of the statement made by the Archaeological Survey of India, which debunked the claim of a temple underneath the Taj Mahal.”

NBDSA concluded that the broadcast “fell short of the standards of neutrality and impartiality mandated under the Code of Conduct.” The authority clarified that the question was not whether sufficient prominence had been given to opposing views, but “whether the broadcaster had presented any counter view, at all, particularly, one which is grounded in official records.”

NBDSA accordingly directed Aaj Tak to edit the programme insofar as the Taj Mahal segment is concerned.

We take no ads, bow to no government or corporation, and answer only to you, the reader. This Press Freedom Month, pay to keep news free.