In a recent legal development in the Sanatana Dharma controversy involving Udhayanidhi Stalin, a prominent figure within the DMK, the Madras High Court witnessed intriguing proceedings. During these proceedings, Senior Counsel P. Wilson, who was representing the case, declined to submit a video clip of Udhayanidhi’s speech, as instructed by Justice Anita Sumanth. Wilson cited Article 20(3) of the Constitution, arguing that he could not be compelled to do so.

The Commune reported that Wilson urged the judge to direct the petitioner to provide the necessary evidence independently. He contended that Udhayanidhi was a participant, not an organizer, and questioned the absence of the organiser, the Tamil Nadu Progressive Writers and Artists’ Association, which is the cultural and literary wing of the Communist Party of India-Marxist, from the case.

These statements from Senior Counsel P. Wilson were made during the hearing of the quo warranto petition, a legal challenge to the eligibility of individuals holding public office. The petition was filed by members of the Hindu Munnani, questioning the basis on which DMK Ministers Udhayanidhi Stalin and PK Sekar Babu, along with DMK MP A. Raja, continued to hold office after allegedly making remarks against Sanatana Dharma (commonly referred to as Hinduism). The hearing took place before Justice Anita Sumanth.

During the proceedings, Senior Counsel Wilson argued that the petitioners should have presented evidence when filing the case rather than seeking it afterward. He stressed that the DMK Ministers were participants, not organizers, and invoked Article 20(3) of the Constitution, which grants immunity against self-incrimination. Wilson also accused the BJP of “politicizing the case” and conducting a parallel trial on social media, mentioning that details of the hearings were being misrepresented on Twitter by BJP Tamil Nadu President K. Annamalai and others.

However, the judge clarified that she would base her decision on the arguments presented in court rather than external sources. Justice Anita Sumanth emphasised the importance of providing materials when requested to assist the court.

The judge scheduled the next hearing for November 7, allowing time for Senior Counsel Wilson and Advocate General R. Shanmughasundaram to prepare a counter-affidavit in response to the petitioner’s application.

In October 2023, DMK Minister Udhayanidhi Stalin submitted an affidavit to the Madras High Court, stating that his remarks about eradicating Sanatana Dharma were made in his “personal capacity” and not as a Minister.