Former Madras High Court judges K. Chandru and Hari Paranthaman, who today are nothing less than DMK stooges have called for the impeachment of Justice GR Swaminathan giving flimsy reasons that he is an RSS ideologue, believes in the Vedas, participates in RSS events and what not.
“A High Court judge cannot behave like H Raja or Governor RN Ravi. Political ideology, if any, must never enter judicial pronouncement“, said Hari Paranthaman.
K. Chandru who is known for his casteist remarks against Brahmins and had even made sexist remarks against Nirmala Sitharaman had said “He behaves as if he is the propaganda secretary of the RSS and its other outfits. He freely attends their meetings and gives lectures denigrating the Constitution under which he had taken his oath of office. His speeches in various forums regarding having belief in the Vedas are to the least expected of a sitting judge.”
For weeks now, DMK leaders and Dravidianists have been running a coordinated whisper campaign that Justice GR Swaminathan is “right-leaning”, “Hindu-leaning”, or “connected to Hindu Munnani.”
There is no proven evidence that Justice Swaminathan currently belongs to, works for, or acts on behalf of Hindu Munnani.
None. Not a single official document, not a single judicial finding, not a single institutional report.
The Dravidiods cite a The News Minute interview from 2015 when GR Swaminathan was a judge.
However, they seem to have only twisted his words. He has only said that he follows the Hindu Munnani’s ideology and has not claimed to be a part of it. What’s Hindu Munnani’s ideology? To protect Hindu rights and Hindu temples, prevent religious conversion and make Hindus self-aware about being united.
Even if he once spoke at cultural events, that does not amount to organisational membership, and certainly not “ongoing affiliation.”
GR Swaminathan himself has told that he attends seminars organized by Pa. Ranjith’s Neelam organization but no on questioned him then.
Yet the same people who are baying for impeachment over imaginary affiliations suddenly pretend to lose their voice when far stronger, far historically documented political backgrounds of other judges are brought up.
If association, real or alleged, is their standard, then the Dravidianists must first explain their decades-long silence on the following names.
The Hypocrisy Index: Judges With Open, Documented Political Or Ideological Histories
#1 Justice K Chandru – Full-time Communist Party cadre
Before elevation, Justice Chandru was a full-time CPI(M) worker, a student leader of SFI, a public face of Left activism for decades.
No Dravidianist ever objected.
No impeachment petitions.
No editorials claiming “partisanship.”
Why? Because he leans in their preferred ideological direction.
And to the BJP’s credit, they never cried foul or moved impeachment motion against Chandru for being a Leftist-Dravidianist ideologue and sitting as a judge.
Justice GR Swaminathan delivered approxiamtely 30 judgements per day (and ongoing) during his 7 year tenure as the permanent judge of the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court.
The reason why Justice GR Swaminathan of the #MadrasHighCourt is the darling of the Madurai Bar is his impressive case disposal statistics. He has disposed of 73,505 main cases in the last eight years & does not hesitate to begin court at 9 am & continue till late evenings. pic.twitter.com/xdZK0yeGqJ
— Mohamed Imranullah S (@imranhindu) December 10, 2025
Even today, Justice Chandru is seen at DMK/DK/VCK related events, he was also the one-man committee that wrote a shoddy report on “eradicating caste” in Tamil Nadu following a spate of caste-based killings and attacks in the state – his solution? Removing tilak from everywhere and everybody – just what the DMK wanted.
#2 Justice S Ratnavel Pandian – Former DMK District Secretary
This is not a rumour. This is documented political history.
Justice Pandian served as DMK Tirunelveli District Secretary, then became a Madras High Court judge, and went on to become a Supreme Court judge.
He was district secretary/general secretary of the DMK in the undivided Tirunelveli district in the 1960s. He contested the 1962 Assembly election from Ambasamudram as a DMK candidate and lost. He contested again from Cheranmahadevi in 1971, lost narrowly, and then quit electoral politics. During the anti‑Hindi agitations, when M Karunanidhi was jailed in Palayamkottai prison, Pandian is recorded as visiting him regularly as a party functionary. Only after this DMK stint was he brought into key legal posts – Appointed State Public Prosecutor in Madras High Court in August 1971, held that post till elevation as judge in February 1974. He was elevated as judge of Madras High Court (1974), later acting Chief Justice (1988), then judge of the Supreme Court of India (1988–1994).
Judiciary was not biased then?
Why? Because he belonged to their political family.
#3 Justice D. Hariparanthaman — Anti-BJP ‘Activist’ Post-Retirement
Since retirement, he has participated in political rallies, signed joint statements with parties and movements, taken public positions on issues that are anti-Hindu. If he is so vocal and virulent about the Dravidianist ideology now, after retirement, one only wonders how much he would have been influenced by it when he was still in office.
Here is a look at his order that favoured the Dravidianist ideology. In April 2015, the then Madras High Court Justice D Hari Paranthaman overruled a police ban and allowed Dravidar Kazhagam to conduct its controversial “mangalsutra removal and beef banquet” event, citing protection of freedom of expression under Article 19 as the court’s priority. He quashed the Assistant Commissioner’s prohibitory order and directed police to provide protection for the April 14 programme.
All this is sidelined and instead, his political alignments are treated as a badge of honour.
#4 Justice N Senthil Kumar – Govt Advocate
Son of former DMK MLA KS Sankaravalli, this sitting judge first served as a Government Advocate (writ side) in 2007, before being elevated to Additional Government Pleader (writ side) between 2009 and 2011 – both times the DMK was in power.
In fact, his neutrality became a point of discussion during the Karur TVK stampede when the judge made scathing remarks against actor and TVK chief Vijay.
But the DMK invokes “neutrality” when they want to target someone who refuses to bend before them.
So Why the Selective Outrage Against Justice GR Swaminathan?
Because Justice Swaminathan has done the one thing Dravidianists cannot tolerate – He refuses to be intimidated.
He has authored judgments that uphold temple rights, question administrative overreach, protect religious freedoms, and refuse to accept Dravidianist dogma as constitutional gospel.
And to top it all, he is a “parpaan” in their view, a Brahmin, a community against whom their ideologue EV Ramasamy Naicker had genocidal hate.
In Dravidianist politics, this alone is enough to brand someone “Hindutva,” “right-wing,” “RSS,” or “Sanghi.”
The I.N.D.I bloc’s petition seeking his impeachment for “partisan orders” was nothing but a political stunt – a message to every neutral, fair, and just judge in India: “Rule as we want, or we will try to destroy your reputation.”
That is political intimidation disguised as moral outrage.
If political identity is the concern, then start with your own icons. If the Dravidianists truly believe a judge’s alleged ideological past disqualifies him, then why was a full-time Communist cadre (Justice Chandru) elevated? Why was a DMK District Secretary (Justice Ratnavel Pandian) welcomed into the High Court and Supreme Court?
You cannot run a judiciary on one set of rules for comrades and another set for those who respect Hindu traditions.
Enough. Time To Shut This Manufactured Narrative Down.
Dravidianists have zero moral standing to question Justice Swaminathan’s neutrality when judges with open, documented, decades-long political identities have served without objection, their own governments have celebrated such judges, and their ecosystem has never raised a whisper about ideological conflict, until a judge refuses to toe their line.
This is political vendetta, plain and simple.
Until Dravidianists are willing to question the political pedigrees within their own favourite judges, they have no authority – moral, intellectual, or constitutional, to target Justice Swaminathan.
Their mouths should remain shut until they answer for the political histories on their side of the aisle.
Subscribe to our channels on WhatsApp, Telegram, Instagram and YouTube to get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
