Sanatana Dharma Case: SC Rebukes Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin
Vignesh Subbaian (Author) Published Date : Mar 04, 2024 17:40 ISTTamil Nadu
The Supreme Court has advised Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin that while speaking as a minister, he should realize the consequences and speak.
The Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers Association organized the Sanadhan Abolition Conclave in Chennai. Tamil Nadu Minister Udayanidhi Stalin participated and reportedly said that "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. Rather opposing Sanatana, it should be eradicated."
BJP has spread in North Indian states that Udayanidhi Stalin said that the followers of Sanatana Dharma should be massacred. As a result, Prime Minister Modi and many Union Ministers have condemned Udayanidhi. Cases were also filed against Udhayanidhi Stalin in various states in this regard.
Meanwhile, Stalin clarified that his statement on Sanatana Dharma was not against Hinduism or the Hindu way of life but was merely a call for ending caste-based discriminatory practices.
Following this, a petition was filed in the Supreme Court on behalf of Udayanidhi Stalin. Cases have been registered against him in various states. It was requested that all these cases should be tried together as a single case.
A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta told senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Stalin, that he should approach the High Court for relief.
"You abused your right under Article 19(1)(a) for freedom of speech and expression of the Constitution. You abuse your right under Article 25 for freedom of religion. Now, you are exercising your right under Article 32 of the Constitution? Do you not know the consequences of what you said," the bench asked.
The bench said, "You are not a layman; you are a minister, and you should know the consequences." However, the court posted his plea on the March 15 hearing for going through the judgments and progressing in the proceedings in some of the cases.
