Sanatan Dharma case: What SC said on Udhayanidhi Stalin's abuse of fundamental rights

Multiple FIRs Filed Across India Against DMK Leader

An FIR each has been lodged in Uttar Pradesh, Maharashtra, Karnataka, and Jammu & Kashmir, while two were filed in Bihar against the Tamil Nadu minister. The FIRs accused Stalin of allegedly hurting the religious sentiments of Hindus by comparing 'Sanatan Dharma' with diseases like dengue, malaria, and corona, and advocating for its eradication in a manner similar to how diseases are being eradicated.

Udhayanidhi made the comments during an event titled 'Sanatana Eradication Conference,' organised by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers Artists Association in Chennai on September 2, 2023.

Also Read | Udhayanidhi Stalin's 'Sanatan Dharma' remark amounts to 'hate speech' : Eminent citizens write to CJI

Several media reports quoted Udhayanidhi as saying, "There are some things that we have to eradicate and we can’t merely oppose. Mosquitoes, dengue, corona, and malaria are things that we cannot oppose, we have to eradicate them. Sanatanam is also like this. Eradication and not opposing Sanatanam has to be our first task."

Moneycontrol could not verify the report independently.

DMK Leader Faces Backlash

Several leaders and individuals vehemently criticised the DMK leader for his statement, with some even demanding an apology from the INDIA bloc, given that the DMK is a member of the INDIA alliance.

"I never called for the genocide of people who are following Sanatan Dharma. Sanatan Dharma is a principle that divides people in the name of caste and religion. Uprooting Sanatan Dharma is upholding humanity and human equality," Udhayanidhi wrote in a message on X in September 2023.

What Supreme Court said on Stalin Case?

Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta, leading the bench, bluntly criticised Udhayanidhi, stating, "You abuse your right under Article 19 (guaranteeing free speech) and Article 25 (freedom to practice and profess any religion) and then come to Supreme Court invoking Article 32 (right to approach SC directly for breach of fundamental right)."

Justice Datta emphasised, "You (Udhayanidhi) are not a layman. You are a minister. You know the consequences of your utterances."

Singhvi Clarifies: Seeking Consolidation, Not Justification

Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, representing Udhayanidhi, clarified that he was not justifying his client's comments but was only seeking consolidation of the FIRs lodged against him in six states. The SC Court then directed him to approach the respective high courts concerned.

Singhvi cited previous SC orders in cases involving journalist Arnab Goswami, BJP leader Nupur Sharma, and others, where the court had agreed to consolidate FIRs.

"I'm not saying one word on merits (of the case), I'm not justifying or criticising. Let the merits of the case not affect the plea for clubbing of the FIRs," Singhvi said.

SC Agrees to Hear Plea Seeking FIR Against Udhayanidhi

On September 22 last year, the SC had agreed to hear a plea filed by Chennai-based lawyer B Jagannath, seeking the registration of an FIR against Udhayanidhi and others who supported him, likening his comments to hate speech.

Also Read | Sanatan Dharma row: BJP slams opposition bloc INDIA as 'anti-Hindu', Congress says it respects all religions

In his plea, Jagannath requested the court to direct the Tamil Nadu police chief to immediately register a FIR against the organisers of the conclave and those who allegedly made "hate speeches" there, including ministers Udhayanidhi, PK Sekar Babu, and others.

The petitioner also urged the court to declare as unconstitutional the participation of state ministers in the event titled 'Sanatana Dharma Eradication' conference.

DMK's Atheism Stance Under Scrutiny

The DMK is known for its staunch adherence to atheism. Earlier, more than 260 eminent individuals, including former judges and bureaucrats, penned a letter to Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, urging him to take notice of Udhayanidhi's statement advocating the eradication of "Sanatan Dharma."

In the letter addressed to the CJI, signatories such as former Delhi High Court judge S N Dhingra highlighted that not only did Stalin make a hate speech, but he also refused to apologise for his comments.