A judge makes a harmless quip at a public function. A media outlet turns it into a morality play about judicial bias, communal danger, and institutional collapse. That is how The News Minute sets a narrative, paints someone they don’t like (especially from the opposite camp) as a bigot.
A recent 3 minute short by The News Minute on Justice GR Swaminathan’s remarks at an event organized by Dhara Foundation recently. The video does not merely critique a judicial order or examine public conduct. Instead, it carefully strings together insinuations that paint a sitting High Court judge as communal, reckless, and politically aligned, all while cloaking the exercise as concern for “public confidence in the judiciary.”
What starts as a quip about the Thirupparankundram Karthigai Deepam court order devolves into a vicious narrative painting a sitting Madras High Court judge as communal, reckless, and unfit. And the hypocrisy? TNM deploys a young Muslim girl, Azeeza Fathima, as their star witness against Sanatana Dharma and this very judge, while staying stone-silent on card-carrying judges who moonlight as political activists.
Contempt In Plain Sight: TNM’s Poisonous Quotes
TNM doesn’t just critique; it poisons the well with statements that scream contempt of court. Consider these direct pulls from their script: “This was not just a joke. It was a reference to a controversy simmering with communal tension in Tamil Nadu.”
Here, TNM flatly labels a lawful judicial order of allowing Karthigai Deepam lamps on the Deepathoon as inherently “communal.” No analysis of the order’s merits, no context on the history of the ritual or annual traditions. Just a smear imputing communal motive to a sitting judge. Under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (Section 2(c)), this edges into “scandalizing the court” by attributing bias without evidence, eroding public trust in judicial impartiality.
Worse follows: “Justice Swaminathan allowed it. The order triggered protests and raised serious law and order concerns… a judge whose order almost triggered a law and order situation.”
This is a blatant accusation. TNM holds the judge personally responsible for “triggering” protests and near-riots, as if maintaining order is his job, not the Tamil Nadu Police’s or DMK government’s. Such language implies judicial recklessness, precisely the kind of prejudicial commentary courts have struck down (recall EMS Namboodiripad v. T. Narayanan Nambiar, 1970, where ascribing improper motives to judges was held contemptuous).
The script piles on: “A judge whose order almost triggered a law and order situation, who now faces an impeachment notice, is publicly joking about it and framing his future work in explicitly religious terms.”
The Joke As Evidence, Religion As Indictment
The video treats Justice Swaminathan’s joke about the Deepam controversy as proof of impropriety, asking whether “levity is the right response” from a judge facing impeachment demands. It then ties this to his past public statements on Sanatana Dharma, including remarks such as “if you protect the Vedas, the Vedas will protect you,” and his hope that Sanatana Dharma will live forever.
Judges are allowed to hold beliefs. Judges are allowed to speak on culture and philosophy. What the video does is not question the legal correctness of any judgment but suggest that these beliefs, when articulated, undermine judicial impartiality itself.
That suggestion is serious. It implies that religious conviction is incompatible with judicial office, but only when the religion in question is Sanatana Dharma. Did they forget that it was the same judge who quotes the Bible and Quran with equal ease?
TNM links a pending impeachment (sought by DMK partisans) to “religious” impropriety, suggesting the judge’s personal faith (Sanatana Dharma references) disqualifies him. This isn’t fair comment; it’s a motive-imputing hit-job on a live judicial tenure. As a journalist, as a media house, they do not question the grounds for impeachment – do they need lessons?
What is worse you ask – TNM’s double standards hit peak absurdity when they parade their minion to pontificate on Sanatana Dharma and critique Justice Swaminathan’s beliefs. Yet this same channel ignores judges who flaunt political affiliations, Leftist darlings at rallies, “secular” icons soft-pedaling on Islamist extremism, or post-retirement Congress joiners. No videos, no “public confidence” lectures for them. Why? Because TNM’s outrage is partisan, not principled.
From Critique To Character Assassination
Line by line, the video accumulates insinuations:
- that the judge’s order was “communal”
- that it emboldened extremist groups
- that it risked public disorder
- that his religious language reveals bias
- that joking about controversy is unbecoming
- that impeachment demands lend moral weight
Individually, each claim may sit just within the boundary of harsh criticism. Together, they form a portrait of a judge as irresponsible, partisan, and unfit, without ever saying so explicitly. This is how contempt is laundered through tone.
Indian courts have repeatedly held that while judgments may be criticised, imputing motives, questioning integrity, or suggesting alignment with political or communal forces crosses a line. The News Minute skirts that line not once, but consistently.
The Real Threat To Judicial Credibility
TNM ends with a sanctimonious flourish: “The judiciary… rests on public confidence. And that confidence is shaped… by what judges say and do outside [court].”
Irony alert: it’s TNM’s contempt-laced hit-pieces that shred confidence, selectively targeting Hindu-leaning judges while cheerleading the ideologically aligned. If Azeeza Fathima’s “take” on Sanatana Dharma merits airtime, why not grill DMK ministers who make anti-Hindu statements, call for eradication of Sanatana Dharma? Or summon experts on judges who’ve ruled with blatant political wink-wink?
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
