Mahant Raju Das, a priest from Hanuman Garhi, is facing a defamation case for his comments about Mulayam Singh Yadav. He reportedly posted on X, suggesting harmful actions against a statue of Yadav placed in a camp supported by SP workers at the Maha Kumbh. His remarks have led to legal action and public criticism, creating tension around the issue. Authorities are looking into the matter as it gains attention.
Varanasi: A defamation case has been filed against Mahant Raju Das, the priest of Hanuman Garhi, in a Varanasi court for allegedly making derogatory remarks about the late Samajwadi Party (SP) founder Mulayam Singh Yadav, a lawyer reported on Friday.
Das recently posted on the social media platform X, calling for an offensive action against a statue of Yadav located in a camp supported by SP workers at the Maha Kumbh.
The Varanasi civil court accepted the case and scheduled a hearing for February 17, according to advocate Prem Prakash Yadav, who filed the lawsuit.
He stated,
“Raju Das made disrespectful comments about Mulayam Singh Yadav, the champion of the poor, which has deeply hurt our sentiments. The matter was taken to the Varanasi civil court, which admitted the case and fixed February 17 for the hearing. We want the court to impose the strictest punishment on Raju Das to deter others from making such remarks against great leaders,”
SP spokesperson Manoj Rai Dhoopchandi mentioned that party workers had previously approached the Varanasi police commissioner to file a complaint against Das.
Dhoopchandi added,
“However, no action was taken on our plea. The court has now accepted the case, but the Varanasi police should also take appropriate action against him,”
Das’s comments sparked strong reactions from SP supporters, and Uttar Pradesh Minister Omprakash Rajbhar, chief of BJP’s ally SBSP, also condemned the remarks.
Rajbhar stated,
“Mulayam Singh Yadav was a chief minister of the state for several terms and had also served as defense minister. He was a major leader working for the backward communities. I condemn the remarks which should not have been made,”
The remarks ignited widespread criticism, with many accusing the seer of inciting disrespect and creating unnecessary tension. This led to legal action being initiated against him.
The case has drawn significant attention, highlighting the intersection of politics, religious figures, and the limits of free speech in public discourse. Authorities are now investigating the matter, while debates over the implications of such statements continue.