New Delhi. The Supreme Court on Monday slammed Udayanadhi Stalin, son of Tamil Nadu CM MK Stalin, for his controversial remarks on Sanatma Dharma. After the controversial statement, Udhayanidhi had reached the Supreme Court with the demand to club together the FIRs lodged against Stalin at various places in the country. The Supreme Court told Junior Stalin, who had commented “Abolish Sanatan Dharma”, that he cannot compare himself with media persons.
Senior advocate Abhishek Singhvi, appearing for the Tamil Nadu minister, said the comment was not intended to be a “political war cry” as it was a gathering of only 30 to 40 people. A bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Dutta allowed Udhayanidhi Stalin to amend his plea in view of “legal issues” and listed the matter for hearing in the week commencing May 6. The bench said, “You have given a voluntary statement.” You cannot compare media persons with ministers. You have cited cases of media persons who have to follow the instructions of their bosses and take care of TRP and other things.
Also read:- Arvind Kejriwal will stay in Tihar Jail No. 2, place made for CM by shifting this big leader
What arguments did Stalin give in the court?
The bench made the above remarks during the hearing of the writ petition of Udhayanidhi Stalin to club together several FIRs. In this petition, the minister had cited journalists Arnab Goswami, Mohammad Zubair and others, who were earlier given relief by the apex court by clubbing the FIRs registered against them and transferring them to one police station. Singhvi, appearing for Stalin, said he had cited several cases, including those of journalists and leaders like Nupur Sharma, where the court had issued writs under Article 32 of the Constitution to transfer and club together multiple FIRs filed in different states. Jurisdiction has been exercised.
Also read:- Mumbai Police had to handcuff its own inspector, he did this disgusting act by placing a barricade on a deserted road
Nupur Sharma case was also mentioned in the court
He said the law applicable to the case of former BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma, who was suspended by the party for allegedly making objectionable remarks against Prophet Mohammed, is equally applicable to the petitioner as he too is a “politician”. Justice Dutta said that Sharma’s case is also not similar to that of the minister (Stalin). The bench told the minister that he could have filed a petition in the apex court under Section 406 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which provides for transfer of criminal cases, but under Article 32 of the Constitution relating to writ jurisdiction. can not be done.
Sanatan was compared to Corona virus
Justice Dutta said, “Look, cognizance has been taken in some cases and summons have been issued. The Supreme Court cannot conduct judicial proceedings under writ jurisdiction.” Tamil Nadu Youth Welfare and Sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin is a famous film actor and son of Chief Minister and DMK (Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam) chief MK Stalin. Udhayanidhi Stalin had said in a conference in September 2023 that Sanatan Dharma is against social justice and equality and should be “eradicated”. He compared Sanatan Dharma with Corona virus, malaria and dengue and said that it should be destroyed.
,
Tags: hindi news, MK Stalin, Supreme Court
FIRST PUBLISHED: April 1, 2024, 23:49 IST