Supreme Court Issues notice to Udayanidhi Stalin on Sanatan Dharma remarks
The Supreme Court has responded to a petition calling for the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against Udhayanidhi Stalin, the Youth Welfare and Sports Development Minister in Tamil Nadu and the son of Chief Minister MK Stalin. The petition arises from Udhayanidhi's recent comments, where he suggested that 'Sanatan Dharma' was at odds with the concept of social justice and advocated for its elimination.
Udayanidhi's marks over Sanatan received condemnation from Bhartiya Janta Party and followers of Sanatan Dharma across the country.
Udayanidhi Stalin
A bench of justices, including Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi, has issued notices to both the Tamil Nadu government and Udhayanidhi Stalin. During this process, the bench noted that the petitioner had the option to approach the local high court as the initial step.
The bench remarked, "Why are you here? You go to the high court. Your request is for an FIR to be registered. You are turning us into a police station," underlining that the high court has the authority to grant the requested order.
However, the petitioner's senior lawyer argued that several matters related to hate speech were already pending before the Supreme Court. He contended, "When the state itself launches an attack against a specific religion and compels children to speak against it, the Supreme Court is the only recourse. There is a circular issued by state authorities two days ago stating that children would speak against Sanatan Dharma."
The senior counsel asserted that this case involves a constitutional authority inciting religious sentiments, necessitating the intervention of the apex court.
Initially hesitant to consider the petition filed by B Jagannath, a lawyer practicing in the Madras high court, the bench eventually agreed to admit the plea and issue notices. The respondents named in the petition include Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Charitable Endowment Minister Sekar Babu, Lok Sabha Member of Parliament A Raja, DMK President Veeramani K Veeramani, and Chairman of Tamil Nadu State Minorities Commission Peter Alphonse.
Udhayanidhi's controversial comments were made during a conference in Chennai organized by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers Artists Association on September 2, with the theme of 'eradication of Sanatan.' He stated, "A few things cannot be opposed, that should be abolished only. We can't oppose dengue, mosquitoes, malaria, or corona. We have to eradicate this, that's how we have to eradicate Sanatana."
While his remarks sparked a political uproar, with several Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leaders criticizing him, Udhayanidhi firmly stood by his words and expressed his readiness to face any legal challenge.
On September 7, Tamil Nadu Chief Minister MK Stalin defended his son's statements, arguing that they were aimed at challenging principles that discriminate against Scheduled Castes, tribals, and women.
Jagannath's petition in the Supreme Court alleges that the September 2 conference was organized to incite the eradication of a specific religion, referring to Hinduism as 'Sanatan Dharma.' Describing it as a case of "hate speech," Jagannath seeks action against Udhayanidhi for expressing such hostility toward Hindus. He contends that the failure to file an FIR against Udhayanidhi and the conference organizers implies bias, favoritism, and discrimination against Hindus in the state.
The petitioner also highlighted that in a 2018 Supreme Court judgment, the court mandated the appointment of a nodal officer to combat hate speeches and register FIRs when necessary. However, the Tamil Nadu government has not yet complied with this court order.
Also Read-PM Modi Applauds Passage of Women’s Quota Bill
OTT India updates you with the latest news, The Country’s no.1 digital news platform OTT India, Keeps you updated with national, and international news from all around the world. For more such updates, download the OTT India app on your Android and IOS device.
.