Udhayanidhi Stalin voluntarily made ’Sanatana Dharma’ remark, can’t get same immunity as media, says SC

The Supreme Court said on Monday that Tamil Nadu minister and DMK leader Udhayanidhi Stalin cannot get the same immunity as the media in connection with the case pertaining to his "eradicate Sanatan Dharma" remark.

"You (Stalin) have made the statements voluntarily," a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta was quoted by PTI as saying.

The Supreme Court said this while dealing with a plea filed by Stalin, seeking to club multiple criminal complaints registered against him in several states for making the controversial remark.

ALSO READ: Supreme Court slams DMK's Udhayanidhi Stalin over remarks on 'Sanatana Dharma': You abuse your rights…

According to PTI, he sought relief from the Supreme Court to club all the FIRs, saying FIRs are registered in Uttar Pradesh, Karnataka, Bihar, Jammu and Kashmir and Maharashtra.

In 2023, Stalin had stirred controversy by saying, "Just like dengue, mosquitoes, malaria, or coronavirus need to be eradicated, we have to eradicate Sanatana."

During the hearing, Stalin relied on judgements rendered by the Supreme Court in cases involving journalists such as Republic TV anchor Arnab Goswami, Mohammed Zubair, Amish Devgan and Nupur Sharma.

ALSO READ: After Sanatana Dharma remark, Udhayanidhi Stalin calls BJP a 'snake', AIADMK 'garbage mound'

However, a bench of Justices Sanjiv Khanna and Dipankar Datta said Stalin cannot claim to be in the same position as media and journalists.

"After all, you have made the statements voluntarily. And the cases you cited - those were news media people who were working as per diktats of their bosses to get TRPs. You cannot compare yourself to the media," the court was quoted by the Bar and Bench as saying.

Senior advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi, appearing for Stalin, highlighted the case of BJP spokesperson Nupur Sharma. Sharma had multiple FIRs lodged against her in different states and later transferred to one State. "Nupur Sharma is a pure politician," Singhvi told the bench.

Reacting to this, the Supreme Court questioned why Stalin had filed a petition before the Supreme Court under Article 32 (remedies for enforcement of fundamental rights) of the Constitution instead of invoking Section 406 (power of Supreme Court to transfer cases and appeals) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

ALSO READ: Sanatan Dharma Remark Row: Supreme Court issues notice to Tamil Nadu govt, Udhayanidhi Stalin

The Supreme Court then ordered Stalin to amend his plea and file it under Section 406 CrPC, news agency PTI reported. The court listed the matter for hearing in the week commencing on May 6.