Dravida Model social justice DMK government’s minority appeasement came to the fore more blatantly in its argument before the Madras High Court, stating that the custom of animal sacrifice had been in vogue for ages.
The argument of the DMK government of Tamil Nadu, made before the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court, asserted that the practice of sacrificing animals had long been followed at Thiruparankundram Hill in Madurai. The sacred Thiruparankundram Temple has been in the news after some Muslims tried to slaughter animals during a procession, which was stopped by police and the public following outrage from Hindu devotees. This was followed by Ramanathapuram MP K. Nawas Kani (IMUL) and another MLA, who brought biryani (non-veg food item) to the hills and ate it. The video of them eating went viral on social media. He claimed that the hill belonged to the Waqf Board. Hindu organisations opposed a move to rechristen the hill as Sikkandar Hills, named after Sikkandar, who ruled Madurai as a representative of the Sultans of Delhi. With the court’s permission, a massive protest was organised in February 2025, and the Madurai Murugan Conference on 22 June adopted a resolution to protect the Thiruparankundram Hill and prevent its renaming in any manner, as it belonged to Bhagwan Murugan.
While this was so, in a Public Interest Litigation filed by Solai Kannan, the Madurai district president of the Hindu Makkal Katchi, it was claimed that the ancient Subramaniya Swamy (Murugan) Temple holds ownership over Thiruparankundram Hill. He cited a ruling from the British era and argued that key locations on the hill, including the Sikandar Badusha Dargah, the flagpole in front of it, an eel tree grove, the steps leading to the Dargah, and a newly constructed mandapam, were all under the temple’s jurisdiction.
Solai Kannan requested the court to prohibit individuals from performing animal sacrifices involving goats, cows, and chickens on the hill, and from attempting to rename or represent the hill as “Sikandar Hill.” Several other related petitions seeking various forms of relief were also submitted, including one that sought official recognition of the hill as “Samanar Kundru (Jain Hills)” due to its Jain historical links.
A division bench comprising Justices J. Nisha Banu and S. Srimathy considered the matter. On June 24, Justice Nisha Banu rejected all petitions, while Justice Srimathy issued a separate judgment. As a result of the split verdict, the matter was escalated to a third judge, R. Vijayakumar, who took up the case on August 11, 2025. During the hearing, the judge questioned whether there was historical or documented proof referring to the site as Sikandar Hill and whether animal sacrifices were indeed a longstanding tradition there.
Justice S. Srimathy held that the Dargah must first approach a civil court and provide proof that the practices of Kandoori animal sacrifice and religious prayers on Ramzan, Bakrid, and other Islamic festivals existed before the year 1920. Until such evidence is submitted and verified, the court said these practices cannot be considered established customs. Justice Nisha Banu ruled against banning animal sacrifices and Muslim gatherings at the Dargah.
In response, Additional Chief Government Advocates Veera Kathiravan and Ravindran emphasised that religious practices should not be discriminated against based on caste, religion, or dietary customs. They presented records indicating that the location had been known as Sikandar Hill and that the practice of sacrificing goats and chickens had been ongoing. They also pointed to similar rituals carried out at the 18th Karupanaswamy Temple in Alagarkoil.
They concluded by stating that religious freedoms must be respected, and no one should obstruct another’s right to practise their faith. Following these arguments, the judge postponed the hearing.
Coming down heavily on the TN government for its stand in the case, Hindu Munnani condemned the Stalin government for supporting Muslim claims, which it said were nothing but a clear case of minority appeasement with the Assembly polls fast approaching. In a three-page statement, State president Kadeswara Subramanian said, “Both the State and District Collector’s counsel argued that it had been called Sikkandarmalai for a long time, where animal slaughter had been followed. It was also argued that there should be no ban on Muslims performing Namaz in the Nellithoppu area. While the HR and CE department told the court that the hill belongs to the Murugan Temple and that no animal sacrifice would spoil the sanctity of the hill.”
Instead of putting forth the stand of the government, the statement said, it had submitted the policies of the DMK party, which are a clear betrayal of Hindus. It showed their anti-Hindu stance. Time has come to teach a befitting reply to the DMK for its anti-Hindu policies. All over the country, temples were pulled down to make way for mosques. Contrary to the beliefs of Hindus, the sacrifice of animals was prevented in such places of worship. But in Tamil Nadu, Muslims who had encroached on the Thiruparankundram Hill by building a Dargah including some fundamentalists and anti-national elements are now trying to create problems. It is for the DMK government to act in an unbiased manner, stressing the truth and debunking the lies of the other side. But instead, it helps Muslims with its favourable arguments and falsehoods, only to spoil the sanctity of the temple, which is condemnable.
