‘Anti-Sanatan’: Anurag Thakur attacks Tamil Nadu govt over Karthigai Deepam controversy; asks 'why are Hindus lathi charged'?

NEW DELHI: BJP MP Anurag Thakur on Friday criticised the Tamil Nadu government over the Karthigai Deepam dispute, alleging that it has adopted what he called an "anti Sanatan" stance.

Raising the issue in the Lok Sabha, the BJP MP said, "I want to raise a very important issue where one state in India has become a symbol of anti-Sanatan Dharma. Their ministers are making statements against Sanatan Dharma." He added that devotees had been compelled to seek judicial intervention to access the temple.




Thakur referred to the Madurai bench of the Madras high court, which recently pulled up the state government, accusing officials of ignoring its order on lighting the Karthigai Deepam lamp at Madurai's Thiruparankundram temple. He said, "People were forced to approach the court to reach the temple. The Madurai bench of the Madras High Court came down strongly on the Tamil Nadu government, accusing officials of deliberately ignoring its order on lighting the Karthigai Deepam lamp at Madurai's Thiruparankundram temple."

The minister further alleged that devotees faced police action during the episode. "Hindus are lathi-charged... Why are Hindus stopped?..." he asked, pressing the government over the treatment of worshippers at the temple.

The Karthigai Deepam row escalated sharply lastweek as the Tamil Nadu government again declined to comply with a Madras High Court order permitting the lighting of the ceremonial lamp at the Deepathoon stone pillar atop Thiruparankundram hills. This marked the second consecutive day of defiance, even as a division bench rejected the state’s appeal against contempt proceedings initiated for non-compliance.

Tensions rose on the ground, with BJP state chief Nainar Nagendran and several party workers detained in Madurai during protests against the state government. Over 1,000 police personnel were deployed as security forces stopped petitioners and supporters from reaching the hilltop despite the court’s direction.

Earlier, a bench of Justices G Jayachandran and K K Ramakrishnan dismissed the state government’s appeal, calling it an attempt to pre-empt contempt action. The bench upheld single-judge Justice G R Swaminathan’s order allowing petitioners to light the lamp at Deepathoon under CISF protection. The single bench had initiated contempt proceedings after officials facilitated lighting the lamp at Uchi Pillaiyar Temple instead of at Deepathoon as directed on December 1.

Following the dismissal of the appeal, Justice Swaminathan resumed contempt hearings, set aside the prohibitory orders issued by the Madurai district administration, and again permitted the lighting of the lamp at the hilltop, this time under the protection of Madurai city police. The judge warned that if officials continued to ignore the order, “harsh consequences will ensue.” Officials again blocked access, citing public order concerns.

Meanwhile, the Tamil Nadu government approached the Supreme Court seeking an urgent hearing on its appeal against the High Court’s orders. When mentioned before a bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, the court declined to provide an immediate listing, saying it would consider the request as soon as possible. The state argued that it had exclusive authority over temple rituals and customs under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act of 1959, and said the High Court could not use contempt jurisdiction to intervene in matters of religious practice.

Appearing for a caveator, advocate P V Yogeswaran criticised the state’s approach. He said the government was “repeatedly defying the HC’s orders” and “creating a drama” by filing an appeal to stall contempt proceedings. The High Court has maintained that its directions do not affect the rights of the adjacent dargah and has upheld the petitioners’ right to perform the ritual at the designated Deepathoon site.

The state’s appeal in the Supreme Court describes the issue as raising broader questions about the limits of contempt jurisdiction, the autonomy of temple management, and the interplay between judicial orders and executive enforcement powers. It pointed to the district administration’s prohibitory orders issued around 6pm on December 3, at the same time Justice Swaminathan had directed that the petitioner be allowed access to the hilltop. The High Court division bench earlier observed that executive orders under Section 162 of the BNSS cannot override judicial directions and described the timing of the prohibitory orders as indicative of a “well-designed act” to avoid compliance.

The division bench will hear related appeals from the Madurai district collector and temple authorities on December 5. Justice Swaminathan had earlier permitted petitioners, including Rama Ravikumar, to light the lamp at Deepathoon after dismissing the state government’s objections about the site’s proximity to a dargah and claims that the ritual had long been conducted at Uchi Pillaiyar Temple.
Select The Times of India as your preferred source on Google Search