- Home
- /
- Top Stories
- /
- Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain...
Supreme Court Refuses To Entertain Writ Petitions Seeking Action Against Udhayanidhi Stalin For 'Sanatana Dharma' Remarks
LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK
27 Jan 2025 4:42 PM IST
The Supreme Court on Monday (January 27) refused to entertain three writ petitions seeking criminal action against Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin for the controversial speech made by him in September 2023 about 'Sanatana Dharma'.A bench comprising Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Prasanna B Varale expressed disinclination to entertain the matter, asking how the...
The Supreme Court on Monday (January 27) refused to entertain three writ petitions seeking criminal action against Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin for the controversial speech made by him in September 2023 about 'Sanatana Dharma'.
A bench comprising Justice Bela M Trivedi and Justice Prasanna B Varale expressed disinclination to entertain the matter, asking how the writ petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution could be maintained.
Senior Advocate Dama Seshadri Naidu, for the petitioners, then sought permission to withdraw the petitions with liberty to pursue other remedies. Accordingly, the petitions were dismissed as withdrawn, granting petitioners liberty to avail alternative remedies under the law.
Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appeared for the State of Tamil Nadu and Senior Advocate P Wilson for Udhayanidhi Stalin.
The Court was hearing the writ petitions filed by B Jagannath, Vineet Jindal and Sanatan Suraksha Parishad. The petitions were filed in the wake of the controversy created by Udhayanidhi's comment that 'Sanatana Dharma' was a disease which had to be eradicated like Dengue, Malaria, etc. The petitioners contended that the speech amounted to "hate speech" and offended their religious sentiments.
Petitioner B Jagannath sought direction restraining Stalin and others from making further remarks about 'Sanatana Dharma', and a declaration that the speech was unconstitutional. Apart from Udhayanidhi, Vineet Jindal sought action against DMK MP A Raja, who publicly supported Udhayanidhi's comments. The other petitioner, Sanatan Suraksha Parishad, sought guidelines to prevent communal remarks by elected representatives.
The Supreme Court had in 2023 issued notice on the petitions to the respondents. A petition filed by Udhayanidhi Stalin seeking consolidation of the criminal complaints filed against him in different parts of the country is pending in the Supreme Court.
Cases : B Jagannath v. The State of Tamil Nadu| W.P.(C) No. 1001/2023; Vineet Jindal v. Union of India & Ors. | Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 443 of 2023; Sanatan Suraksha Parishad; Sanatan Suraksha Parishad v. Union of India & Ors. | Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1170 of 2023