'Sanatan Dharma' remark: No fresh FIR against Udhayanidhi Stalin sans our nod, says Supreme Court

Observing several complaints couldn't be filed on a single issue, a bench comprising Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar also extended an interim order on his exemption from personal appearance in courts hearing the existing FIRs.

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Thursday ordered that no further cases should be registered against Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin without its permission over his controversial 'Sanatan Dharma' remarks made in September, 2023.

A bench of Chief Justice of India Sanjiv Khanna and Justice Sanjay Kumar issued the order while hearing a plea by Udhayanidhi for clubbing the criminal cases registered against him across multiple states.

Udhayanidhi is a well-known film actor and son of Chief Minister and DMK chief M K Stalin.

Taking up his plea, the bench said there should not be filing of more complaints regarding the same matter.

Senior advocate A M Singhvi, appearing for Udhayanidhi raised the issue of filing of new complaints. “Since, the last time the chart…three different states on top later on are Patna, Jammu, Bengaluru, Bihar, and the last one is Jodhpur," he said.

The counsel said in Arnab Goswami, Mohammed Zubair, and Nupur Sharma cases, FIRs were clubbed. "In Nupur Sharma case, words were much more offensive. The court transferred all cases to the first place (of registration of the FIR)…that is the solution in this case," Singhvi said.

He submitted that in the last hearing, the court had indicated that FIRs could be clubbed and transferred to Karnataka.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the Maharashtra government said a writ petition was filed by one Shaheen Abdullah in which the bench led by the then judge of the Supreme Court Justice K M Joseph directed several preemptive steps like videography by police etc, upon an apprehension that some Hindu leader may use hate speech.

He said that the court, on a complaint by the said petitioner, had not only directed registration of FIR by Maharashtra police but also monitored the investigation.

In the instant case, Mehta said it was the Sanatan Dharma eradication conference. The bench told Mehta that the court is not getting into the merits of the matter. Udhayanidhi's counsel also opposed Mehta's submissions.

On this, Mehta said, “Why are they ashamed of what is being told. The deputy chief minister says some of the things are not to be dealt with, they have to be eradicated like mosquito, corona, dengue etc…Kindly appreciate if the chief minister of another state would have said a particular religion say Islam should be eradicated”.

The bench told Mehta that they are not going into the merits of the matter. “We are only considering whether it should be transferred to one place…we have a very limited issue before us,” the bench said.

Mehta said, it can't be merely because a community which sought to be eradicated does not react in a violent way by threatening.

“As an apex court, we would not like to comment on any words. They have an impact on the trial,” the bench said.

Mehta said irresponsible comments were made by an individual. Opposing Mehta’s submissions, Singhvi said he was speaking for another audience.

The bench issued notice on an intervention application filed by Udhayanidhi to the respondents’ including the newly added respondents’ and listed the matter in the week commencing on April 28.

“Interim order to continue and equally apply to cases now mentioned in the amended writ petition. We also deem it appropriate to direct that no further cases will be registered without permission of this court,” the bench said.

Mehta said there is one matter pending filed by a public-spirited person that wherever there are similar speeches the court is directing the registration of FIRs, and urged the bench to allow this matter to be heard with this matter. Wilson opposed this submission by Mehta.

The bench said the court was aware of that matter and applications were filed by different parties.

“We have said that we will not come directly into the picture,” the bench said.

The court reiterated that it was not going into the merits and demerits of the case. Mehta said let both matters be heard together. The bench said that it is pending before the court in another matter, and that case is dealing with a larger issue.

Mehta said individual facts are being brought before the court. The bench said the court is not entertaining those individual facts. Mehta said earlier benches have directed. Wilson said politics is different from legal. Mehta, contesting this submission, said this was purely legal.

Speaking at a conference in September 2023, Udhayanidhi Stalin said Sanatan Dharma is against social justice and equality and should be "eradicated'. He likened Sanatan Dharma to coronavirus, malaria and dengue, and said it should be destroyed.

Udhayanidhi had moved the apex court seeking the consolidation of FIRs and five complaints filed in Jammu and Kashmir, Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan, Bihar, Maharashtra, and Karnataka and the transfer of the same to one of the criminal courts/ police stations.