The Supreme Court addressed a defamation case involving Union Minister L Murugan, remarking on the challenges of politics, including dealing with critiques. Murugan appealed against a Madras High Court ruling allowing defamation proceedings stemming from his comments about Murasoli Trust. The Supreme Court has adjourned the case to December 5, highlighting the tension between free speech and accountability.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court, while hearing a defamation case involving Union Minister L Murugan, remarked on Wednesday that
“when you enter politics, you should be ready to receive all sorts of unwarranted, unnecessary compliments.”
The bench, comprising Justices B R Gavai and K V Viswanathan, was addressing Murugan’s plea challenging the September 5, 2023, order of the Madras High Court, which refused to quash criminal defamation proceedings against him. The case stems from allegations made by the Chennai-based Murasoli Trust concerning Murugan’s statements at a December 2020 press conference.
During the hearing, the bench highlighted the resilience required in public life, saying, “Nowadays, it is said in Maharashtra that if you have to be in politics, you must have the skin of a rhino.” It also noted the need for breathing space in free speech matters.
Justice Gavai further suggested that disputes such as these should be resolved in the public arena, emphasizing, “They should fight the battles before the public.”
Murugan’s counsel was asked if the minister was willing to state he had no intention to defame the Murasoli Trust, to which the trust’s counsel sought additional time to consult.
Murugan, the Union Minister of State for Information and Broadcasting, is accused of defaming the Murasoli Trust with alleged statements intended to “degrade and tarnish the reputation” of the organization. He challenged the High Court’s dismissal of his plea to quash the proceedings, which the top court stayed in September 2023.
The High Court, while rejecting his petition, clarified that it “cannot go into the merits of the case or disputed questions of fact” at the quashing stage. It directed the trial court in Chennai to resolve the case within three months.
The Supreme Court has adjourned the matter to December 5, providing time for the trust’s counsel to seek further instructions.
The case underscores the delicate balance between free speech and accountability in public office, particularly when political figures face allegations of defamation.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE