The conference “Annihilation of Sanatana Dharma” has been in the limelight for all the wrong reasons since the time it took place on September 2, 2023, as it witnessed inflammatory speeches by several individuals, including Sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin and Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Minister PK Sekarbabu.
Justice Jayachandran noted the police’s inaction in response to speeches advocating the eradication of Sanatana Dharma, a significant religion in India. He cited a petitioner’s request to organise a meeting aimed at countering Dravidian ideology, highlighting the authorities’ negligence in addressing provocative statements.
Sanatana Dharma row | Failure of Tamil Nadu police to act against Sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin & Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowments Minister PK Sekarbabu amounts to dereliction of duty, says Justice G Jayachandran of #MadrasHighCourt @THChennaihttps://t.co/QnEyqnPewc
— Mohamed Imranullah S (@imranhindu) November 6, 2023
During the conference, Udhayanidhi Stalin made remarks suggesting that Hinduism should be abolished, comparing it to various diseases like leprosy, AIDS, and a deadly killer. Minister Sekar Babu also participated in the event, further fueling controversy. Following these statements, police complaints were filed against Udhayanidhi Stalin and others.
Legal Actions and Petitions
Chennai-based lawyer B Jagannath filed a petition in the Supreme Court, seeking police direction to register FIRs in response to these statements. Additionally, a writ of Quo Warranto was submitted. Hindu Munnani functionaries filed a similar Quo Warranto against Udhayanidhi Stalin, Sekar Babu, and A. Raja.
In a surprising turn of events, Udhayanidhi Stalin, during a hearing, claimed that he had attended the conference in a personal capacity and not as a minister. However, video and audio evidence contradicted his statement, indicating that he had indeed participated in the event as a minister.
During a previous hearing, Senior Counsel P Wilson, representing Udhayanidhi Stalin in a Quo Warranto petition, refused to submit a video clip of Udhayanidhi’s speech, defying Justice Anita Sumanth’s instructions.
Justice Jayachandran’s Condemnation
Justice Jayachandran’s critique extended beyond the legal proceedings. He observed that the Tamil Nadu police were guilty of dereliction of duty for not taking action against Udhayanidhi Stalin and Sekar Babu for their participation in a conference advocating the annihilation of Sanatana Dharma. He pointed out that the police’s failure to act against those delivering inflammatory speeches was a breach of their duty.
The petitioner, who had sought action against the ministers and other individuals for their remarks at the conference, now requests permission to organise a meeting to counter the Dravidian ideology. This request stems from the belief that such a gathering is necessary due to the authorities’ lack of action.
Justice Jayachandran expressed apprehensions about the potential for further disturbance to public peace and tranquilly if the petitioner’s request were granted. He emphasised that individuals in positions of power should comprehend the dangers of divisive speeches and behave responsibly.
The judge clarified that the court could not permit the petitioner to hold a conference to eradicate the Dravidian ideology. He contended that no person in India has the right to propagate divisive ideas or conduct meetings aimed at abolishing or eradicating any ideology. He emphasised the significance of coexistence of multiple and diverse ideologies as an integral aspect of the country’s identity.
Challenges Faced by Tamil Nadu Police
Tamil Nadu police have faced criticism on several fronts in recent times. They have been accused of prioritising actions against critics, particularly from the BJP and Sangh Parivar, for their social media posts over their regular law enforcement duties. Courts have reprimanded the police for their failures to address rising crime rates and other issues, prompting concerns about their performance and accountability.
As the situation unfolds, the Tamil Nadu police are under increasing scrutiny, and the justice system will play a vital role in determining the course of action and accountability in these controversial cases.
