Chennai, July 8 (IANS) The Madras High Court on Tuesday decided to keep pending its suo motu case against former Tamil Nadu Forest Minister K. Ponmudi, who allegedly made lewd and derogatory remarks involving the religious symbols of Hindu sects, the Shaivites and the Vaishnavites.
The remarks were reportedly made by Ponmudi during a meeting organised by the Thanthai Periyar Dravida Kazhagam (TPDK) on April 8.
The former minister narrated a controversial anecdote involving a prostitute who asked a man if he was a Shaivite or a Vaishnavite before stating her rates based on sexual positions.
The comments sparked widespread outrage and led to his removal from the post of DMK Deputy General Secretary.
Despite the Tamil Nadu Police closing over 120 complaints filed in the matter, the High Court bench of Justice P. Velmurugan expressed concern over the state’s handling of the issue, making it clear that the court could not remain a “silent spectator” to such incidents and emphasised that freedom of speech under Article 19 of the Constitution is not absolute.
“Nowadays, all politicians, all persons making public speeches, think Article 19 gives them absolute rights — that the sky is the limit. But there are reasonable restrictions. There are several sects and religious communities in this country. Public figures must act responsibly. This is a democratic country, not a monarchy,” Justice Velmurugan observed sharply during the hearing.
Representing the state government, Advocate General P.S. Raman informed the court that the police had decided not to register FIRs after conducting preliminary inquiries, concluding that Ponmudi merely repeated an old anecdote.
However, the judge questioned the basis of such a conclusion during a preliminary inquiry stage. “The police cannot write a judgment during a preliminary inquiry. They cannot say it is not hate speech at that stage. Can they say only the original speaker can be punished, not the one who repeats it?” he asked.
The court also directed that all complainants must be properly informed about the closure of their cases. If any complainant later alleges that they were not informed, the court warned it would take stern action against the state.
Justice Velmurugan also stated that the court would closely monitor the developments, especially if the complainants choose to escalate the matter to higher police authorities. “Let them invoke. Meanwhile, we will keep the case pending and see what happens. The court wants to vigilantly watch,” he said.
The matter has been adjourned to August 1 for further hearing.
–IANS
aal/vd