On Wednesday (27 September), the Supreme Court refused to issue notice for the registration of an FIR against Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin and others in response to a fresh plea in connection to their hate speeches against Sanatan Dharma. The bench noted that a similar plea had been filed before the apex court in this matter. Subsequently, it ruled to tag it with the existing plea in this case.
BREAKING: Supreme Court REFUSES to issue notice in plea seeking registration of FIR against @Udhaystalin, others for hate speech remarks against Sanatan Dharma. Petitioner @vineetJindal19 sought for it to be treated at par with case concerning hate speech against muslims. Bench… https://t.co/z7eRH0i41U
— LawBeat (@LawBeatInd) September 27, 2023
The two-judge bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M Trivedi was hearing the matter. Delhi-based lawyer Vineet Jindal had moved the Public Interest Litigation (PLI) urging the Supreme Court to treat this case of hate speech against Sanatan Dharma at par with cases that pertain to hate speech against Muslims.
Tamil Nadu’s Additional Advocate General (AAG) Amit Anand Tiwari representing the DMK-led state government, argued against the filing of another PIL claiming that it makes the job of state governments difficult.
Arguing before the court, he said, “These are public interest litigation in the nature of ‘publicity interest litigation’. What is the need for another petition?” He lamented, “There are 40 writ petitions filed across the country in different high courts. It makes it incredibly difficult for the State.”
Tamil Nadu AAG Amit Anand Tiwari: These are public interest litigation in the nature of 'publicity interest litigation'. What is the need for another petition?
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 27, 2023
Bose J: The question of entertaining we will see on the next day.#SupremeCourtofIndia #UdhayanidhiStalin…
To which, Justice Bose noted that he has an appropriate remedy under the Constitution.
AAG Tiwari: There are 40 writ petitions filed across the country in different high courts. It makes it incredibly difficult for the State.
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 27, 2023
Bose J: You have appropriate remedy under Constitution.
AAG: We have taken up, but now everyone is coming up as a public interest…
However, the Tamil Nadu government’s counsel continued and lamented that writ petitions are being filed before the high courts to get publicity.
He said, “Everyone filing PILs for publicity, they will go to the media and circulate these.”
However, the petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Raj Kishor Choudhary objected to his statement. He asserted that a genocidal call was made by the leaders of the Tamil Nadu government.
Advocate Raj Kishor Choudhary, appearing for petitioner, objects to AAG Tiwari's statement.
— Live Law (@LiveLawIndia) September 27, 2023
Choudhary: A genocidal call has been made by the State!
AAG: Scurrilous remarks…It's very unfortunate.
Bose J: We have not issued notice. Let it be tagged. We will see on that day.…
Responding to his assertion, AAG replied, “Scurrilous remarks. It’s very unfortunate.”
Afterwards, Justice Bose ordered to tag the current plea with another similar plea ongoing in this case. Justice Bose said, “We have not issued notice. Let it be tagged. We will see on that day.”
It is important to note that last week, the Supreme Court issued a notice in another similar plea against Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin over his hate speech against Sanatan Dharma.
On Saturday (2 September), the son of Tamil Nadu Chief Minister and Stalin Jr. equated Sanatan Dharma with diseases like Malaria and Corona and blatantly asserted that it should not be opposed but rather should be eradicated.
The DMK leader said, “Mosquitoes, dengue, flu, malaria, corona – we should not oppose these things. They’ve to be eradicated completely. The same is the case with Santanam (Hinduism). Our first work should be to abolish/eradicate Sanatanam instead of opposing it,” from the dias of “Eradicate Sanatan Conference”.
Many other leaders of DMK, the ruling party in Tamil Nadu, have also given anti-Sanatan remarks. Evidently, in the long list of such leaders, DMK leader A Raja argued that Sanatan Dharma should have been compared with HIV, leprosy and Udayanidhi Stalin was soft in comparing it with dengue or malaria.
