In a significant development, the Madras High Court on April 23 initiated suo motu proceedings against Tamil Nadu Minister Ponmudi for his recent remarks related to Saivism, Vaishnavism, and women. Justice Anand Venkatesh directed the Registry to commence writ proceedings and instructed that the case be placed before the Chief Justice for further action.
"Prima facie, the act of the Minister appears to constitute hate speech and attract the ingredients of the offence under Sections 79, 196(1)(a), 296(a), 299, and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023," stated the court.
Read Also:-Madras High Court Dismisses Petitions by Tamil Nadu and TASMAC Against ED’s Search Operations
Section 79 of BNS deals with words, gestures, or acts intended to insult the modesty of a woman. Section 296(a) punishes those who commit obscene acts in public places. Section 196(1)(a) covers any expression, written or spoken, that promotes disharmony or hatred between different religious or social groups. Section 302 involves uttering words with a deliberate intent to wound religious feelings.
The court sharply criticised the inaction of the State police in handling the matter, especially considering a previous court order.
"This court pointed that the Minister had admitted to making the statement and was removed from the post. Still, the police authority, tasked with tackling hate speech, remained motionless... The continued inaction is most distressing. As a constitutional court, this court is under obligation to ensure that TN police follows direction of SC (reg hate speech). In matters concerning hate speech, there is zero tolerance," the court stated.
Earlier, on April 17, the court had directed the Tamil Nadu government to register a First Information Report (FIR) against Minister Ponmudi in relation to his controversial comments. The court warned that if the State failed to file an FIR, it would proceed with suo motu action.
The judge emphasized the need for accountability, stating that such remarks should not come from individuals in high public office.
Read Also:-Madras High Court Explores SOP for Supporting Children Traumatized by Witnessing Crimes
"A message should be sent so that in the future, people would not venture to make such spurious statements," the court said. "People holding such a position, and such statute, should not be making such comments."
The court also stressed that hate speech should be dealt with equally, regardless of the speaker's political affiliation.
"When the government was taking serious actions against others for making hate speech, the same should be done when someone from their own party was making such comments," the judge remarked.
During the latest hearing, Senior Advocate P. Wilson, appearing for the Tamil Nadu Police, submitted that a preliminary enquiry had been conducted into two complaints against Minister Ponmudi. He said the complaints were closed as no prima facie case was established. He also noted that the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court had disposed of two related cases on the same grounds.
In response, Senior Advocate Vikas Singh, representing Ponmudi, argued that the controversial speech was delivered at a closed-door meeting, and only a truncated version of it had surfaced in public. He also pointed out that the statement referred to events that had occurred approximately four decades ago and that no case was made out.
The case is now set to proceed further as per the directions of the Chief Justice. The court's firm stance highlights the increasing judicial scrutiny on hate speech and the obligation of constitutional authorities to ensure the law is upheld, regardless of political influence.
