The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court held that calling for the “eradication” of Sanatana Dharma carries genocidal implications and constitutes hate speech, while quashing the FIR against BJP leader Amit Malviya for his critical X post.
The Madras High Court granted bail to temple activist Rangarajan Narasimhan in two cases, including one involving a secretly recorded phone conversation. The court found inadequate grounds for custodial interrogation and noted that derogatory remarks against women did not meet legal harassment definitions. Narasimhan must avoid contacting certain individuals and delete offensive content.
Today, On 22nd November, the Supreme Court postponed the hearing regarding Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin’s controversial statement about “eradicating Sanatan Dharma,” rescheduling it for February 2025. The remarks have led to multiple FIRs against him and ignited significant political debate over freedom of speech and communal harmony in India.
![[Defamation Suit] DMK Moves HC Against AIADMK Chief EPS For Defamation, Seeks Rs 1 cr In Damages](https://i0.wp.com/lawchakra.in/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/DMK-files-defamation-suit-against-EPS-claiming-Rs-1-crore-for-defaming-CM.png?resize=447%2C300&ssl=1)
The DMK in Tamil Nadu has filed a defamation suit (25th Oct) against AIADMK chief Edappadi K. Palaniswami, seeking Rs. 1 crore in damages. The case, presented by R.S. Bharathi, accuses Palaniswami of falsely linking the DMK to drug-related allegations and damaging its public image. A hearing is scheduled for next week.
Today, On 14th August, The Supreme Court granted Udhayanidhi Stalin exemption from personally appearing in cases related to his controversial ‘Sanatana Dharma’ remark. The court instructed opposing petitioners to submit arguments in writing, addressing multiple cases filed against him. The court also issued a notice regarding his plea to consolidate the criminal cases filed in various states.
The Karnataka High Court, on Friday(June 21), temporarily halted criminal proceedings against three organizers of a Chennai event where controversial remarks on Sanatana Dharma were made by DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin. Justice Krishna S Dixit’s decision offers interim relief until the court hears the organizers’ petition to dismiss the case.
Today(on 10th May), The Supreme Court addressed Udhayanidhi Stalin’s plea to consolidate cases over his Sanatana Dharma comments. Notices were issued to states and complainants after a petition amendment. The Court’s consistent stance on Stalin’s remarks highlights the legal scrutiny and widespread repercussions, emphasizing responsible speech and the need for social harmony.
Today(on1st April),The Supreme Court rejected Udhayanidhi Stalin’s plea to consolidate complaints against him, differentiating his remarks on Sanatana Dharma from media statements. Despite his legal comparisons and representations, the court directed him to amend his plea and scheduled the next hearing for early May. Stalin’s controversial remarks continue to evoke legal responses and public reactions.
The Madras High Court Today rejected ‘quo warranto’ petitions against DMK Ministers Udhayanidhi Stalin, P K Sekar Babu, and MP A Raja, dismissing challenges to their eligibility stemming from alleged disparaging remarks about Sanatana Dharma. Justice Anita Sumanth emphasized the responsibility of public officials to verify historical facts and maintain decorum, highlighting the court’s stance on free speech and public office conduct.
