Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam (DMK) leader and former Minister K. Ponmudy has approached the Madras High Court to set aside a private complaint lodged against him by the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP)’s Greater Chennai Corporation councillor, Uma Anandan, for comments he made in 2025, which were criticised for being offensive to Vaishnavites, Saivites, and women.
The III Metropolitan Magistrate at George Town in Chennai had taken cognisance of the private complaint, lodged for alleged offences under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (previously Indian Penal Code), on February 23, 2026 and ordered issuance of summons to the former Minister.
In her complaint, Ms. Anandan had stated she came across a YouTube video of the Minister’s speech delivered at an event in Chennai in April 2025. She found it to be highly distasteful and also intended at promoting enmity between different groups of people besides being prejudicial to maintenance of harmony.
She said, in the speech delivered during his stint as Forest Minister, Mr. Ponmudy had recalled an incident of a person having likened the pattai (a horizontal symbol displayed by Saivites on their forehead) and tiruman (a vertical symbol sported by Vaishnavites on their forehead) to description of sexual postures by a sex worker.
Since the speech amounted to wounding the religious feelings of the two sects professing Hinduism besides falling under the definition of hate speech, the complainant initially approached the police. But the police closed her complaint and hence she had chosen to approach the Magistrate by way of a private complaint.
Opposing her plea before the Magistrate, the counsel for the former Minister had contended the complainant had not made out any offence under Sections 196(i)(a) (promoting enmity between different groups), 299 (deliberate and malicious acts intended to outrage religious feelings) or 302 (uttering words with intent to wound religious feelings) of BNS, 2023.
It was also brought to the notice of the court that the speech was delivered inside a closed hall. The counsel contended the former Minister had merely recollected what was already said several decades ago and there was no malicious intent to outrage anyone’s religious feelings.
However, after hearing both sides, the Magistrate highlighted that the former Minister had not denied making any such speech. Whether such speech would fall under the definition of hate speech or not and whether the offences alleged by the complainant had been made out or not could be decided only after a full fledged trial, the judicial officer said.
“Prima facie case is made out against respondent (Mr. Ponmudy) for offences Under Section 196(i)(a), 299, 302 of BNS, 2023. This court is inclined to take cognizance of the above said offences against the accused. Issue summons to accused,” the Magistrate had ordered on Feburary 23 leading to the present plea before the High Court to set aside the private complaint.
Published – March 24, 2026 05:44 pm IST
