New Delhi, Jan 21 (UNI) BJP spokesperson Shehzad Poonawalla has slammed Udhayanidhi Stalin, after the Madras High Court (Madurai Bench) quashed the FIR against party leader Amit Malviya over allegedly distorting his comments on Sanatan, adding that the Deputy CM comes from a legacy where abusing Hindus is met with vote-bank applause.
Poonawalla, addressing a press conference here, said the situation is such that the person who delivered hate speech was let- off, while the one who pointed out, flagging it as hate speech, faced force from the government machinery.
Poonawalla demanded the removal of Udhayanidhi from office and that a case be registered against him for what has rightly been termed as hate speech against Hindus.
The BJP leader welcomed the Madras High Court’s decision to quash the FIR registered against Malviya, which he said, was filed as part of a politically motivated action by the DMK government, and clearly a vendetta-driven move.
He alleged that Tamil Nadu’s law-and-order situation is deteriorating and that the entire system is affected by the issue of rampant corruption.
According to Poonawalla, it is to divert attention from such serious issues that these statements are being made against the Hindu community, and appease a vote bank, something which is simply against the constitution.
“Satyameva Jayate,” Poonawalla remarked with reference to Tuesday’s Madras High Court verdict.
He elaborated that Stalin had attended a conference where he called for resistance against Sanatana, also allegedly advocating the eradication of Sanatan.
Poonawalla said he had also compared the Hindu religion to dengue and malaria.
According to the BJP leader, when Malviya flagged the issue through a post on social media, highlighting Udhayanidhi Stalin’s remarks, instead of acting on it, the DMK government put the state machinery, including the police, against Malviya, rather than taking appropriate action against Stalin for such inflammatory statements.
Poonawalla further said the court held that Udhayanidhi’s statements were within the category of hate speech and that the action taken against Malviya amounts to a misuse of the legal process.
“In paragraph 22 of the Madurai Bench judgment, the Court recorded that there are specific instances showing attacks by the DMK on Hinduism, including incidents of cutting the hair tuft, cutting the janeu, and making a pig wear a janeu. Several complaints were filed regarding these incidents, yet no action was taken. The Court observed that it is evident that the DMK directly attacks Hinduism and, as a party, targets the Hindu religion,” Poonawalla said.
