On Thursday, 17 April, the Madras High Court directed Tamil Nadu police to file a case against Minister K Ponmudi for allegedly referencing sex workers while criticising Saivism and Vaishnavism at a public event
Published Apr 23, 2025 | 7:54 PM ⚊ Updated Apr 23, 2025 | 7:54 PM
Tamil Nadu Higher Education Minister K Ponmudy on Tuesday announced he would boycott the Madhurai Kamaraj University's convocation ceremony. (Twitter/KPonmudiMLA)
Synopsis: The Madras High Court on 23 April directed its registry to initiate suo motu proceedings against Tamil Nadu Minister K Ponmudi over his controversial remarks allegedly targeting Shaivism, Vaishnavism, and women. Justice Anand Venkatesh condemned the comments as hate speech and questioned the police’s inaction despite earlier directions to register a case.
The Madras High Court on Wednesday, 23 April, directed its registry to initiate suo motu proceedings against Tamil Nadu Minister K Ponmudi for his controversial remarks allegedly targeting Shaivism, Vaishnavism, and women, calling the statements “hate speech” that cannot be ignored.
The directive was issued by Justice Anand Venkatesh during the hearing of a disproportionate assets case involving the minister.
The judge, taking strong exception to the lack of legal action, questioned why no case had yet been registered over the minister’s controversial statements.
The Madras High Court on Thursday, 17 April, had directed the Tamil Nadu police to register a case against Minister K Ponmudi for controversial remarks made at a public event, where he allegedly referenced sex workers while criticising Saivism and Vaishnavism.
The comments, made during a Thanthai Periyar Dravidar Kazhagam meeting in Villupuram, sparked outrage for allegedly belittling two of Tamil Nadu’s major religious traditions.
Government counsel informed the court that five complaints had been received but no FIR had been filed. The court had earlier asked for a case to be registered and adjourned the hearing.
When the matter resumed, Senior Advocate Wilson, representing the Tamil Nadu government, said that a case related to the same remarks had already been heard and closed by the Madurai Bench, which found no prima facie evidence.
Appearing for Ponmudi, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh argued that the remarks—made inside the Assembly about an event from over 40 years ago—had been taken out of context.
He added that with the Madurai Bench already delivering its judgment, the issue did not warrant a fresh hearing.
However, Justice Venkatesh disagreed. He observed that the minister’s statements had caused deep hurt to followers of both Shaivism and Vaishnavism and that the speech amounted to hate speech under existing legal definitions.
He criticised the police for failing to act despite receiving multiple complaints and Supreme Court guidelines mandating immediate action in such cases.
The court noted that Minister Ponmudi, though convicted in a separate case, is currently out on interim relief granted by the Supreme Court.
Justice Venkatesh remarked that such leniency appears to have been misused and emphasised that hate speech cannot be tolerated in any form.
Accordingly, the judge directed the High Court registry to take suo motu cognizance of the issue and place the matter before the Chief Justice for further action.
(Edited by Ananya Rao with inputs from Subash Chandra Bose)
