Sanatana Dharma row: Petition against me due to ideological differences, Udhayanidhi tells Madras HC

Article 25 read with Article 19(1)(A) clearly protects Udhayanidhi's speech, senior counsel Wilson submitted before Justice Anita Sumanth.

BySouth First Desk

Published Oct 17, 2023 | 11:46 AMUpdatedOct 17, 2023 | 11:46 AM

Udhayanidhi Stalin

Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin has told the Madras High Court that the plea against his holding of public office in the light of his alleged anti-Sanatana Dharma remarks was due to ideological differences, with the petitioner being a Hindu right-wing outfit.

Senior counsel P Wilson, representing DMK leader Udhayanidhi, also said Article 25 of the Constitution, which guarantees the right to practice and propagate religion, also “gives the right to people to practice and propagate atheism”.

Article 25 read with Article 19(1)(A) (freedom of expression) clearly protects the minister’s speech, Wilson submitted before Justice Anita Sumanth on Monday, 16 October.

Sanatana Dharma row: Sadhus protest against Udhayanidhi Stalin in Delhi

Case against the minister

Right-wing outfit Hindu Munnani had filed a quo warranto, challenging Udhayanidhi’s holding of public office in view of his alleged remarks against Sanatana Dharma at an event last month.

Wilson further submitted the petitioners have filed this case because DMK is antithetical to their ideology, and stands for Dravidian ideology and speaks of self-respect, equality, rational thought, and brotherhood, “while the opposing sect speaks of division on the basis of caste”.

The judge posted the matter for further hearing on 31 October, after asking the petitioners to produce the invitation of the event, where Udhayanidhi is alleged to have made the remarks, and the list of those who attended the meeting.

Related: Sanatana Dharma: SC tags fresh plea against Udhayanidhi

What did Udhayanidhi Stalin say?

Speaking at a conference on “Abolition of Sanatana” in Chennai on 2 September, organised by the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers and Artists Association, Udhayanidhi said, “Few things cannot be opposed, they should be abolished.”

Udhayanidhi was speaking about Sanatana Dharma. He blamed Sanatana Dharma for promoting division and discrimination among people and said that it should be “eradicated”.

He added, “We can’t oppose dengue, mosquitoes, malaria or corona. We have to eradicate them. In the same way, we have to eradicate Sanatana, rather than oppose it.”

He also said that the word Sanatanam was derived from Sanskrit, that it was against equality and social justice, and that it had been a hindrance to society.

As a controversy erupted over his comments, DMK MP A Raja, too, waded in and called Sanatana Dharma a “social disgrace”.

Speaking at a protest meeting against Vishwakarma Yojana, organised by the Dravidar Kazhagam in Chennai on 6 September, Raja said Udhayanidhi’s comparisons were too mild and went on to compare Sanatana Dharma to HIV and leprosy.

Karnataka minister Priyank Kharge, also reacting to Udhayanidhi Stalin’s remarks, said that any religion that does not give equal rights is not a religion and “is as good as a disease”.

“Any religion that does not promote equality, any religion that doesn’t ensure that you have the dignity of being a human being is not a religion, according to me. So it is as good as a disease,” Priyank Kharge said.

Related: Stalin, Udhayanidhi accuse BJP of ‘twisting’ Sanatana statement

Uproar against the remarks

The remarks caused an uproar from the BJP and other right wing outfits.

“Why are Opposition leaders like Rahul Gandhi, Mallikarjun Kharge, Nitish Kumar, Mamata Banerjee silent? Are you playing with Hindu sentiments for votes? They should know that hundreds of years of Islamic rule could not exterminate Sanatana Dharma and British imperialism could not dilute it,” said former Union minister and BJP leader Ravi Shankar Prasad.

The Delhi Police received two police complaints from different sources against Udhayanidhi on 3 September.

In one case, right-wing outfit Hindu Sena filed a complaint, with its national president Vishnu Gupta stating that the Tamil Nadu minister had insulted Sanatana Dharma “under a well-thought-out strategy”.

A second complaint was lodged by Vineet Jindal, a practising lawyer.

In a video posted on X, he claimed that what Udhayanidhi had said amounted to hate speech, pointing out that Supreme Court guidelines say anyone delivering a hate speech should have an FIR lodged against them, even if there is no complaint.

The matter is now in the Supreme Court.

(With PTI inputs)