The Supreme Court on Thursday directed the authorities not to register any other criminal case against Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin in connection with his controversial comments on Sanatana Dharma without the Court’s permission.
The Bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar passed the interim order on a petition filed by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader seeking to club all such criminal cases filed against him across the country.
The Apex Court ordered that the interim order would apply on all cases registered against Stalin, including the new ones, and listed the matter for further hearing in April.
An amendment application filed in the matter revealed that a new first information report (FIR) had been registered against Stalin in Bihar as well.
In September 2023, during a conference organised by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers Artists Association in Chennai, Stalin had made the controversial remarks. He said, “Just like dengue, mosquitoes, malaria, or coronavirus need to be eradicated, we have to eradicate Sanatana.”
The DMK leader approached the Supreme Court seeking clubbing of all FIRs registered against him in different parts of the country in connection with the comment so that the same may be dealt with as a single criminal case.
The Bench initially observed that while making the comment, Stalin had abused his rights under Articles 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and 25 (freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion) of the Constitution.
In May 2024, the top court of the country issued notice to several state governments and complainants in the matter, seeking their response to Stalin’s plea.
Stalin defended his speech by saying that it must be viewed in the backdrop of caste-based discrimination. The speech was made before a particular audience, who were followers of the same ideology on the abolition of caste discrimination, he added.
Appearing for Stalin, Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi today mentioned the names of Arnab Goswami and Nupur Sharma, stating that they got away without any consequences despite making worse comments.
Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, representing the Maharashtra government (one of the States where Stalin has been booked), contended that the DMK leader’s comments were irresponsible.
Noting that the event was a Sanatana Dharma eradication conference, SG Mehta contended that what Stalin said was like something was not to be dealt with, but eradicated like Coronavirus.
What would happen if the Chief Minister of another State said that any other religion had to be eradicated, he asked. Merely because the community sought to be eradicated did not react violently, did not mean something like this could be said about it, he added.
The Apex Court refused to comment on the matter, stating that it would impact the trial.
Senior Advocate P Wilson, also appearing for Stalin, offered to take SG Mehta to Tamil Nadu.
Claiming that the SG could meet legal arguments, but not political arguments, Wilson alleged that SG Mehta was making submissions for political masses.
SG Mehta responded by saying that the words were uttered on the soil of Tamil Nadu. Noting that he could not address press conferences, the SG said he was here only to address the court.
When Singhvi told the SG that he was more vehement than a private complainant, the SG replied in the affirmative. Wilson accused the SG of crossing his brief.