These judges have signed statement urging CJI to act against Udhayanidhi Stalin for remarks on Sanatan Dharma

A letter has been addressed to Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud by 262 eminent persons including 14 retired High Court judges seeking suo motu action by the top court against Tamil Nadu minister Udhayanidhi Stalin for his remarks on Sanatan Dharma..The letter said that Stalin's speech has caused anguish in the hearts and minds of common Indian citizens, especially those who believe in Sanatan Dharma.The letter also raised concern that Stalin's remarks could incite communal disharmony and sectarian violence. .The retired judges who have endorsed the letter are:Justice K Sreedhar Rao, former Chief Justice of the Telangana High Court;Justice SM Soni, former judge of Gujarat High Court and Lokayukta of Gujarat;Justice SN Dhingra, former judge of the Delhi High Court;Justice RK Merathia, former judge of the Jharkhand High Court;Justice RS Rathore, former judge of the Rajastan High Court;Justice MC Garg, former judge of the Delhi High Court;Justice DK Arora, former judge of the Allahabad High Court;Justice Pratyush Kumar, former judge of the Allahabad High Court;Justice SN Srivastav, former judge of the Allahabad High Court;Justice Karam Chand Puri, former judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court;Justice SN Agarwal, former judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court;Justice DK Paliwal, former judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court;Justice Lokpal Singh, former judge of the Uttarakhand High Court; andJustice Narender Kumar Jain, former judge of the Sikkim High Court..Other signatories include 130 former bureaucrats (including 20 ambassadors), and 118 armed forces officers..The controversial remarks that triggered the letter were made by Stalin at a press conference, where the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader commented that Sanatan Dharma should be eradicated. “Few things cannot be opposed, they should be abolished. We can’t oppose dengue, mosquitoes, malaria, or corona, we have to eradicate them. In the same way, we have to eradicate the Sanatana (Sanatan Dharma), rather than opposing it,” he said. He is further reported to have remarked that Sanatan Dharma enslaved women and did not allow them to step out of their homes..The letter highlighted that in the case of Shaheen Abdulla vs Union of India, the apex court had observed that fraternity is not possible unless different religious communities are amenable to live in harmony.In that case, the Supreme Court had expressed concern over the growing incidents of hate speeches in the country and directed the government and police to take suo motu action against hate speech without waiting for a formal complaint..The letter further highlighted the importance of Sanatan Dharma and its significance to Hindus in India. Sanatan Dharma is a set of duties and beliefs that provide individuals the freedom to choose their mode of worship, the letter stated.Additionally, it pointed out that Stalin not only made hate speech against this set of beliefs but also refused to apologize for his remarks, insisting that he would continue to make similar statements.The letter further noted that the State Government of Tamil Nadu did not take any action against Stalin and, instead, chose to justify his remarks..The signatories have, therefore, urged the Supreme Court to take notice of the allegedly contemptuous remarks and take decisive steps to prevent the hate speech, in order to preserve public order and peace..[Read Letter].[Read List of Signatories]