Manusmriti remarks: Madras HC refuses to hear plea against VCK leader Thirumavalavan

CHENNAI: Asserting that everyone has freedom of expression and Manusmriti is not a statute book to be read only in a particular way, the Madras High Court on Monday refused to entertain a petition seeking to disqualify Viduthalai Chiruthaigal Katchi leader T Thirumavalavan as a Lok Sabha member.

The bench dismissed the plea as withdrawn after the petitioner sought liberty from the bench to file a fresh plea with the relevant statutes as sought by the court.

The issue pertains to a PIL moved by one S Kasiramalingam seeking disqualification proceedings against Chidambaram MP Thol Thirumavalavan for his recent speech on Manusmriti.

The petitioner stated that the MP had spoken ill of women by making adverse remarks, which is against the oath taken while assuming office as a lawn MP.

The two-member bench of justices M Sathyanarayanan and R Hemalatha hearing the plea sought to know the statutory provisions under which the relief can be ordered.

"The VCK leader has interpreted Manusmtri in his own way and it is a 2,000 years old ancient text and we cannot do anything for that. Everyone has freedom of expression", orally observed the judges.

Advocate RC Paul Kanagaraj for the petitioner argued that Manusmriti is an ancient text and does not exist, however, the MP is seeking a ban for it.

He also contended that the speech made by the MP had created unrest. He further added that the speech created a provocation among various sections of people and he went on to hold a statewide protest calling for a ban on the ancient text that was authored 2000 years ago.

Code of ethics is not statutory and it cannot be imposed, the bench orally observed.

The bench also said, "We want all the elected representatives in the state to act responsibly, however they don't and the court cannot do anything about it."

If it goes beyond decency and morality, the state can take action, added the bench.

The petitioner while concluding his arguments sought for withdrawing the plea with the liberty to file a fresh petition with relevant statutes that were violated by the MP. The court recording the submissions dismissed the plea as withdrawn.