Sanatan Dharma Remarks: SC Defers Hearing Udhayanidhi Stalin's Plea to Club FIRs to 2026
Supreme Court extended interim protection from multiple FIRs against Tamil Nady Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin, said no fresh case will proceed without its permission
Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin
The Supreme Court on Monday deferred to 2026 the plea of Tamil Nadu Deputy Chief Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin seeking consolidation of multiple FIRs and complaints filed across India over his 2023 “eradicate Sanatan Dharma” remarks.
The Bench of Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta heard the matter.
Appearing for Stalin, Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi pointed out that several FIRs had been registered in Patna, Jammu, Bengaluru, Maharashtra and other places, all arising out of the same speech. He urged that the complaints be transferred to Tamil Nadu, where the alleged incident occurred, citing precedents in the cases of Arnab Goswami, Mohammad Zubair and Nupur Sharma.
The Court, however, declined to take up the matter urgently.
When Rohatgi suggested posting it for 2026, the Bench agreed.
Stalin’s controversial September 2023 speech compared "Sanatan Dharma" to diseases like coronavirus, malaria and dengue, calling for its eradication. The remarks had triggered nationwide protests and a spate of criminal complaints.
Notably, on March 6, the Apex Court had declined to comment on the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader's controversial remarks against Sanatana Dharma. A bench led by the then Chief Justice of India (CJI) Sanjiv Khanna had said, "We, as the Apex Court, would not like to comment on any words that may have an impact on the trial." Observing that multiple complaints could not proceed on a single issue, the Court reiterated that no further cases would be registered or pursued without its approval.
Earlier, on 22 September 2023, the Supreme Court had issued notice in a plea by a Madras High Court lawyer seeking action against Stalin for hate speech against Sanatana Dharma. While doing so, it refused to tag the case with the ongoing Haridwar hate speech petitions [Shaheen Abdulla Vs. UOI], while pointing out that the context of this case is different.
In September 2023, the Supreme Court had refused to issue notice in a plea filed by Advocate Vineet Jindal, seeking registration of an FIR against Tamil Nadu Chief Minister M K Stalin's son Udhayanidhi and former Union Minister A Raja for their "derogatory remarks" and call for "eradication of Sanatan Dharma". When the matter was taken up then, the counsel for State of Tamil Nadu referred to the plea as “publicity litigation”.
On 15 September, 2023, a CJI DY Chandrachud led bench of the Supreme Court had refused to urgently hear a PIL filed against Stalin over his recent remarks made on 'Sanatan Dharma'. The CJI had refused to hear the plea filed by a Madras High Court lawyer saying that he had not come under the urgent mentioning list and he had to follow the Standard Operating Procedure circulated by the court.
On September 5, 2023, former judges, government officials and war veterans had written to the Chief Justice of India, requesting him to take suo moto cognizance of the hate speech made by Tamil Nadu Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin on 'Sanatan Dharma', basis the order passed in the Shaheen Abdulla case. CJI Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud was told that Stalin Jr.'s comments could incite communal disharmony and sectarian violence.
An application was also filed in the Supreme Court seeking contempt action against Director General of Police of Tamil Nadu and Kerala for their "blatant disregard" to previous top court's orders and failing to lodge FIR in cases of hate speech, in light of recent remarks on Sanatana Dharma by ruling DMK leaders and Assembly speaker respectively.