The Principal District and Sessions Court in Chennai has granted anticipatory bail to Shri Harihara Gnanasambandha Desiga Paramachariar Swamigal, the 293rd Madathipathy of the Madurai Adheenam, in connection with a case filed against him under various sections of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for allegedly making inflammatory statements during a media interaction.
The case, being investigated by the Central Crime Branch (Cyber Crime, East Zone), was filed following a press interaction held on 3 May 2025, in which the Swamigal spoke about an alleged road accident that occurred near Ulundurpet on 2 May 2025 while en route to the 6th International Saiva Siddhanta Conference at SRM University.
According to the petitioner, his vehicle was hit by another car that lacked number plates and was driven by individuals “appearing to follow the Islamic faith.” During the press meet, he expressed fear of a potential threat to his life and speculated about the religious identity of the occupants of the other vehicle. These remarks, later circulated on social media, sparked criticism and led to allegations of inciting communal tension.
The learned City Public Prosecutor (CPP) opposed the bail plea, arguing that the Swamigal had irresponsibly linked the incident to a communal conspiracy and referred to Pakistan’s involvement, causing public unrest. The prosecution submitted CCTV footage of the accident, claiming it contradicted the Swamigal’s version and showed his vehicle was at fault. The footage also formed the basis for a separate case registered at Ulundurpet Police Station against the Adheenam’s driver.
However, Principal Sessions Judge S. Karthikeyan, after reviewing the footage and video of the press interaction, observed that the petitioner had made “exaggerated statements” but did not appear to have intended to spread communal hatred. The court remarked that the media had posed leading questions and provoked responses from the Swamigal, effectively contributing to the controversy.
“There is no prima facie evidence that the petitioner had any intention to incite communal violence,” the court held, noting that the complaint was not filed by members of the Islamic community but by a practicing lawyer, R. Rajendiran. The judge further stated that any determination of whether the petitioner’s remarks constituted an offence under Sections 192, 196(1)(a), 353(1)(b), and 353(2) BNS would require trial.
While granting anticipatory bail, the court acknowledged the petitioner’s age (67), his religious stature, and his willingness to cooperate with the investigation via video conferencing. The court imposed conditions including non-interference in the investigation, prohibition on tampering with evidence, and a requirement to remain within his place of residence unless summoned otherwise.
Advocates Ramaswamy Meyyappan and Viyyash Kumar G.V. appeared on behalf of the Swamigal. The bail was granted with directions that he appear before the XI Metropolitan Magistrate within 15 days and furnish sureties.
Subscribe to our channels on Telegram, WhatsApp, and Instagram and get the best stories of the day delivered to you personally.
