Sanatana Dharma row | Supreme Court issues notice to T.N. government, Udhayanidhi Stalin

A petition in Supreme Court sought a CBI investigation into DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin’s remarks on ‘Sanatana Dharma’.

September 22, 2023 02:45 pm | Updated 04:08 pm IST - NEW DELHI

DMK leader and Tamil Nadu sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin had remarked that ‘Sanatana Dharma‘ should be eradicated like dengue. File

DMK leader and Tamil Nadu sports Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin had remarked that ‘Sanatana Dharma‘ should be eradicated like dengue. File | Photo Credit: Akhila Easwaran

The Supreme Court on September 22, 2023, sought a response from the Tamil Nadu government, and DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin on a petition seeking investigation into his remarks on ‘Sanatana Dharma’.

A Bench of Justices Aniruddha Bose and Bela M. Trivedi issued notice on the petition filed by advocate B. Jagannath, represented by advocate G. Balaji, seeking a direction to the Tamil Nadu Police to immediately register an FIR against Mr. Udhayanidhi and others who participated in the ‘Sanatana Dharma Eradication Conference’ held on September 2 in Chennai by an organisation called Tamil Nadu Murpoku Ezuthalar Sangam.

The petition also sought a CBI investigation into the incident and unearth “sources responsible for contribution of amount for such organisations and whether there is any element of terror funding involved from across the border”.

“The conference was held specifically to target Hinduism (also referred as Sanatana Dharma) and to abuse, humiliate, speak in derogatory language and spread hatred towards Sanatana Dharma… These acts were first seen in Stalinist Russia for creation of gulags,” the petition claimed.

The plea also sought the court to direct the Tamil Nadu Police to submit a report as to how the conference was given police permission and why no action was taken against the organisers.

It argued that the participation of State Ministers in an event titled ‘Sanatana Dharma Eradication Conference’ was unconstitutional and violative of fundamental right to religion.

The Bench initially asked the petitioner to approach the Madras High Court, if necessary, but later went on to issue notice.

Top News Today

Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in


Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.