5 months ago
98
Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HR&CE) Minister P.K. Sekarbabu has filed a writ appeal before the Madras High court for expunging certain remarks made by Justice G. Jayachandran regarding his participation in the Sanatana Dharma annihilation conference held in Chennai on September 2, 2023.
In the grounds of appeal, the Minister stated a random individual named Magesh Karthikeyan of Chennai had filed a writ petition in the High Court in October this year seeking a direction to the Avadi police commissionerate to grant permission for a conference to criticise the Dravidian ideology.
Justice G. Jayachandran dismissed that writ petition on October 31, 2023. However, while doing so, the judge observed that the failure of the police to act against those who had participated in a conference to eradicate Sanatana Dharma had emboldened others to call for eradication of Dravidian ideology.
“Some members of the ruling party and Ministers participated in the meeting held for eradicating Sanatana Dharma and no action has been taken by the police against them which is dereliction of duty on the part of the police,” the judge had said besides observing that legislators could not act in breach of their oath.
“This court is of the view that persons in power should realise the danger of speeches that could flare fissiparous tendency and behave responsibly and restrain themselves from propagting views which will divide people in the name of ideology, caste and religion,” the judge had added.
Stating that these observations were now being used against him in a quo warranto petition pending before Justice Anita Sumanth, Mr. Sekarbabu said, it was essential to expunge those “unnecessary” comments made against him by Justice Jayachandran in a random case.
Though in normal course, any order passed by on a writ petition filed in the criminal side would have to be taken on appeal only to the Supreme Court, the Minister said, the plea for expunging the remarks could be filed by way of a writ appeal before a Division Bench of the High court itself.
“The honourable Supreme Court as well as our honourable High Court had time and again cautioned judges that such comments about persons who are not parties before the court or parties to the proceedings needs to be avoided,” he said and contended his reputation must be safeguarded.
