Sekar Babu moves HC to expunge judge’s remarks on Sanatana Dharma row

CHENNAI: Tamil Nadu HR and CE minister P K Sekarbabu has moved the Madras high court to expunge certain observations made by a single judge of the court in connection with the Sanatana Dharma row.

Sekarbabu said the observations made by the judge are being used by his political opponents in a petition challenging his authority to hold the office of minister.

The issue pertains to an order passed by Justice G Jayachandran dismissing a petition moved by Magesh Karthikeyan seeking permission for meeting at a closed auditorium to call for ‘eradication’ of Dravidian ideology as countermeasure to the September 2 meet to ‘eradicate’ Sanatana Dharma. In his order dated October 31, the judge observed that “…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.’

Referring to the statement of sports minister Udhayanidhi Stalin in the September 2 meeting, the judge observed that “this court is of the view that persons in power should realise the danger of speech unflaring fissiparous tendency and behave responsibly.”

“Instead of dividing people in the name of ideology, caste and religion, those in power should concentrate on eradicating intoxicating drinks and drugs, which are injurious to health, corruption, untouchability and other social evils, " the judge said in his order.

Aggrieved by the observations, Sekarbabu moved the present appeal seeking to expunge the remarks made by the judge in a case in which he was not a party. The appeal is likely to be taken up for hearing on Monday.

Where are the women judges in higher courts?

Justice Fathima Beevi, the first female judge in Asia, inspired women in the Indian judiciary. However, the representation of women in the judiciary remains low. Only 4% of Supreme Court judges have been women since 1989. Currently, the Supreme Court has four female justices out of 31 male judges. In the lower judiciary, 12.14% of sitting judges are women. The nature of eligibility criteria and lack of consolidated efforts contribute to the underrepresentation of women. India should learn from other countries' efforts to promote diversity in the judiciary.

Judges' appointment case not listed despite judicial order

The hearing on delay in appointing high court judges by the Centre took a curious turn when the case was not listed despite judicial order. The bench denied knowledge of the reason. Advocate Amit Pai raised the issue and Justice Kaul mentioned it should be brought before the Chief Justice. Advocate Prashant Bhushan found it strange and requested an explanation from the SC registry. Justice Kaul stated that he did not delete the matter and that the Chief Justice is aware of it. The bench previously criticized the Centre's pick and choose policy in appointing and transferring judges.