The Madras High Court on Tuesday strongly criticised the Madurai Adheenam for making what it termed “unnecessary” and provocative remarks by claiming that a minor road accident involving his vehicle was an assassination attempt, allegedly carried out by men wearing skull caps and sporting beards, and possibly linked to Pakistan.
Hearing a petition seeking to quash a First Information Report (FIR) registered against the ascetic Harihara Gnanasambanda Desigar, Justice D. Bharatha Chakravarthy questioned the inflammatory nature of the statements.
“Are the people of Tamil Nadu so naive to get provoked by ‘unnecessary’ remarks made by Madurai Adheenam who had termed a minor road accident as an alleged assassination attempt against him, suspected involvement of Pakistan and claimed that the alleged assassins were wearing skull caps and sporting beards?” the judge asked.
The petition was filed to quash an FIR registered by the cyber crime wing of Greater Chennai City Police, based on a complaint from advocate R. Rajendiran. The FIR, dated June 24, invoked multiple sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), including 192 (wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause rioting), 196(1)(a) (promoting enmity between different groups on grounds of religion), 353(1)(b) (statements conducing to public mischief), and 353(2) (making false statements to create communal enmity).
The court viewed CCTV footage of the May 2 incident, played on a tablet by Additional Public Prosecutor (APP) R. Muniyapparaj, and noted that it was in fact the Adheenam’s vehicle that appeared to have been driven rashly.
“A major accident had been averted because of the sagacity of the other car driver who had pulled the brakes at the right moment,” the judge observed.
Continuing his sharp remarks, Justice Chakravarthy questioned the communal tone of the allegations made by the petitioner. “Merely because the occupants of the other car were Muslims, the petitioner appears to have escalated the issue. Are they not your brethren? Are they also not as much Indian as you are?” he asked the Adheenam’s counsel, Ramaswamy Meyyappan.
In defence, Meyyappan argued that the petitioner had been prompted to speak by mediapersons at a private event in Chennai and had not explicitly named any religion in his remarks. He also pointed out that the FIR was registered nearly two months after the statements were allegedly made.
However, APP Muniyapparaj contended that multiple protests had erupted across Tamil Nadu in response to the Adheenam’s remarks and that the offences committed were cognisable. He added that several private complaints had also been filed.
The judge, while not dismissing the seriousness of the allegations entirely, expressed concern about the allocation of police resources. He stated that such resources could be more effectively used to investigate serious criminal cases.
Justice Chakravarthy granted the police time until August 14 to file a counter-affidavit in response to the quash petition.
Separately, the police have reportedly urged the court to cancel the anticipatory bail granted to the Madurai Adheenam in this case.
(With inputs from The Hindu)
Subscribe to our Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram channels and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.