On 6 March 2024, the Madras High Court declined to issue a quo warranto against DMK Sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Minister P.K. Sekarbabu, and Nilgiris Member of Parliament A. Raja concerning the eradicate Sanatana Dharma comments controversy.
Justice Anita Sumanth determined that the relief requested by three separate writ petitioners was premature, citing pending First Information Reports (FIRs) across different police stations without any convictions. Consequently, she asserted that quo warranto writs could not be issued at this stage.
The judge, however, emphasized that the remarks targeting Sanatana Dharma were both objectionable and divisive. She added, “While there may be ideological differences between persons holding power, the differences are expected to be based on a thorough understanding of the system being critiqued, and importantly, such criticism must be constructive and not destructive,” the judge said. She continued to emphasize that statements from incumbent Ministers must be based on factual accuracy. “Whatever may be their ideology, such persons must propound only one morality that is the morality propounded by the Constitution,” she added.
Despite arguments claiming that only Mr. Udhayanidhi Stalin and Mr. Raja had criticized Sanatana Dharma in different events, while Mr. Sekarbabu had only attended one of those events, the judge remarked, “The factum of participation itself shows the endorsement of the purpose of the theme of the conference.”
The judge also remarked, “The statements equating Sanatana Dharma to HIV, AIDS, dengue and malaria, which need to be eradicated are perverse, divisive and contrary to Constitutional principles and ideas and tantamount to gross disinformation.”
The writ petitions were filed by Hindu Munnani office-bearers T. Manohar, J. Kishore Kumar, and V.P. Jayakumar. They explicitly stated that they filed the cases individually, not representing the organization. Arguing that elected legislators should not act against Sanatana Dharma, they emphasized its synonymity with Hinduism. The first petitioner criticized Udhayanidhi Stalin’s call for the eradication of dharma at the ‘Eradicate Sanatana Dharma Conference’ organized by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers Artists Association in Chennai on 2 September 2023.
The second petitioner objected to Minister Sekarbabu’s participation in the conference, even though he did not speak on the subject. The third petitioner claimed that Mr. Raja endorsed Udhayanidhi Stalin’s views at a separate meeting, arguing that he, too, should not continue as a legislator.
In response, the Ministers and MP challenged the viability of the writ petitions. They argued that no quo warranto writ questioning their authority as legislators could be issued, citing reasons stated in the petitioners’ affidavits.
Despite this, the Judge insisted on addressing both the issue of viability and the merits of the case. Following extensive arguments since October, she reserved her verdict on 21 December 2023, after Senior Counsels presented their oral and written arguments.
BREAKING Sanatana Dharma row | Justice Anita Sumanth of #MadrasHighCourt refrains from issuing a writ of quo warranto against Ministers Udhayanidhi Stalin, PK Sekarbabu & MP A Raja @THChennai Backgrounder 👇 https://t.co/ES1RMKHU73
— Mohamed Imranullah S (@imranhindu) March 6, 2024
(with inputs from The Hindu)
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.