Tamil Nadu Government and Police oppose ‘Akhil Bharatiya Sanyasi Sangam’ Convention; Madras HC gives justice to Hindus
 Hindu Sanyasis and devout Hindus had organised the ‘Akhil Bharatiya Sanyasi Sangam’ Convention in Cuddalore, Tamil Nadu on 29th and 30th January 2023. They had applied for and received permission to hold the Convention, from the Cuddalore Municipal Commissioner, but he said that the consent order will come into effect only after receiving approval from other Departments. The Pudhunagar Cuddalore Police Inspector denied permission for the Convention on 14th January. Hindu Makkal Katchi (A devout Hindu party) filed a petition in the Madras High Court against this order, which was heard on 27th January, just 2 days before the Convention. Let us have a look at the developments in the case. |
1. Tamil Nadu Government’s strong opposition to the Convention
The DMK Government opposed the Convention which was to be held on 29th January at the Manjakuppam ground stating that the Convention will be attended by many Sanyasis, Mathadhipatis, devout Hindus, women and Astrologers. If the procession to the Arya Vaishya Tirumala Mandapam ground is permitted, it could likely lead to a major breakdown of law and order. The procession will also be opposed by the banned PFI and others. There will be provocative speeches in the Convention which will disturb social harmony. This city is inhabited by people who speak different languages and belong to many sects and ideologies. Along with this, holding the Convention will increase the transmission of Covid-19 and traffic will also be disturbed. School children and patients in hospitals will suffer too.
The most important argument put forth on behalf of the Government was that on 29th April 1986, Retired Justice Venugopal P had suggested that any procession should not pass through the settlements of people belonging to other faiths. The Government further said that this Convention is being organised by Mr Arjun Sampath, leader of ‘Hindu Makkal Katchi’, who has 38 criminal cases pending against him. The Police justified denying permission by citing these reasons.
2. Madras HC permits organising of the Convention
The Madras High Court, after hearing arguments from both sides, ruled that no blanket ban can be imposed on any All India Convention or a religious event. Doing so would be a violation of Article 25 of the Constitution which gives every citizen the right to practice his religion. Certain conditions and regulations may be placed, but banning the Convention is violative of Article 25 of the Constitution. The Court accepted the writ petition and permitted the ‘Hindu Makkal Katchi’ to hold the Convention on 29th and 30th January at Manjakuppam ground, Cuddalore. The Court also ordered the administration to provide security for the Convention.
The Court asked for an undertaking that ‘speech or opinion of such nature as would disturb social harmony should not be expressed. There will be no hateful criticism of banned organisations such as the PFI and other sects. Organisers should maintain security arrangements through volunteers. Loudspeaker limits should be followed’. The Convention was held as ruled by the Madras High Court.
3. Victory of devout Hindus over the Hindu-hating DMK Government
Over 300 people from across India, including Saints, astrologers, women, activists from Hindu parties were present for the Convention. The horrors of ‘Halal Jihad’ were revealed and the book ‘Halal Jihad ?’, published by Hindu Janajagruti Samiti, was sold in large numbers. A Seminar was held on the topic – ‘Need for the Hindu Rashtra’. Although the Police could not provide security for the event, it was held peacefully.
This makes it clear that the DMK Government in Tamil Nadu consistently takes an anti-Hindu stand. This Government leaves no opportunity to trouble the Hindus. The Police tried to place obstacles, but the Madras High Court gave justice to the Hindus. For this, all Hindus should express gratitude to God and continue to unite other Hindus, no matter how adverse the circumstances may be.
II Shrikrushnarpanamastu II
– H.H. (Adv.) Suresh Kulkarni, Bombay High Court (30.1.2023)