India

Supreme Court Notice on Udhayanidhi Stalin’s Controversial Statements: Legal Battle Intensifies

The legal saga surrounding DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin’s controversial remarks regarding Sanatan Dharma has taken another turn as the Supreme Court issues notice on an amended petition filed by him. The court, after the summer vacation, is set to hear the amended plea which seeks to combine multiple FIRs registered against him in various states.

In the latest development, the court had advised Stalin’s lawyer, Abhishek Manu Singhvi, to consider filing the case under Section 406 of the CrPC instead of Article 32. However, Stalin has proceeded with the amended petition, urging the court to transfer the cases filed in Maharashtra, Bihar, Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, and Jammu and Kashmir to a single jurisdiction.

The crux of the matter lies in Udhayanidhi Stalin’s contentious comparison of Sanatan Dharma with diseases like malaria and dengue, made in September last year. This statement not only sparked political uproar but also led to multiple criminal complaints and a petition in the Supreme Court seeking action against him.

During previous hearings, the court expressed concern over the potential consequences of Stalin’s statements, reminding his counsel that as a minister, he should be aware of the ramifications of his words. The court’s rebuke highlighted the gravity of the situation, emphasizing that public figures bear a greater responsibility in exercising their freedom of speech.

Also read: Supreme Court Upholds Bail For Construction Firm Partner Accused Of Funding CPI 

Abhishek Manu Singhvi, representing Stalin, clarified that they are not justifying the controversial comments but addressing the legal challenges posed by multiple FIRs across states. The court’s scrutiny underscores the delicate balance between freedom of expression and accountability, particularly for those in positions of power.

As the legal battle unfolds, it raises broader questions about the limits of political discourse and the legal mechanisms to address contentious statements. The Supreme Court’s forthcoming decision on the amended petition will likely shape the trajectory of this high-profile case, with implications for both freedom of speech and political accountability.

Kavya Bhatt

Recent Posts

Self-Reliant Defence Industry Marks India’s Strategic Security Ascent

One year into Modi 3.0, reforms have reduced poverty, strengthened defence, and accelerated the digital…

12 mins ago

Survey Shows Over 88% Indians Trust PM Modi On National Interest & Security

A recent News18 survey reveals that more than 88 per cent of Indians trust Prime…

38 mins ago

PM Modi: NDA Government Has Redefined Women-Led Development Over 11 Years

Marking 11 years of the NDA govt at the Centre, PM Modi stated that women-led…

1 hour ago

Team India Begins Training In England Ahead Of Test Series Opener

Team India, led by new captain Shubman Gill, has commenced training in England ahead of…

2 hours ago

Five Districts In Manipur Face Internet Shutdown Following Unrest

Manipur suspended internet in five districts for five days after protests over arrest of a…

4 hours ago

Shashi Tharoor Criticises Pakistan: “In Pakistan You Get Rewarded For Promoting Terrorism”

Shashi Tharoor condemns Pakistan’s treatment of Dr Shakil Afridi, who helped the US locate Osama…

4 hours ago