"If the petitioner has a constitutional right under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, to express his views on religion and existence of God, in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Lalai Singh Yadav's case, we are of the view that the 2nd respondent and the members of the party, or followers of Thanthai Periyar, in exercise of the rights under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, has a right to disagree with the same", the High Court in the judgment stated.
The petitioner had in his petition pointed out the translated version of the inscription which stated that,
"There is no God, no God, no God,
Those who preached God is fool,
Those who spread God is Rogue
Those who pray Gods are barbarians"
Referring to the order of dismissal of the High Court the petition pointed out that, "The Hon'ble High Court's reasons to deny the Petitioner relief are thus premised on the factual finding that 'Periyar' may have in fact supported atheism, without considering that such inscriptions, are not only gravely insulting the religious feelings of believers but also is violative of the constitutional guarantee to practice and propagate one's religion with dignity."
The petition also stated that the High Court ought to have considered that, these statues with such inscriptions are ridiculing the God, the religion and the believer alike that are sanctioned by the State amounts to public vilification of religion and strikes at the essence of secularism which demands strict separation of State and religion.
"By sanctioning such inscriptions, the State has not only alienated, but also discriminated against believers of God, and thereby, violated their right to equal treatment, and right to life with dignity under Article 14 and 21 of the Constitution. Further, State's sanction of such inscriptions is inconsistent with the constitutional guarantees of free thought and conscience, and right to profess and propagate one's religion under Article19, 25 and 26 of the Constitution", the petition added.
It was contended that the contents of the inscription inscribed on the statue amounts to hate speech by the Dravidar Kazhagam, which under the guise of exercising fundamental right under Article 19(1)(a) of Constitution, is actually trying to spread menace in the society on religious grounds. It was added that, "the inscriptions tantamount to causing apprehension to the safety and security of people-of-faith in the State and is laying down groundwork for later attacks on other religious sects. Such hate speeches tend to reduce equal social standing of the people-of-faith and cause a direct affront to their dignity."
The petition also stated that the State of Tamil Nadu has abdicated from its responsibility of protection of human dignity and has denigrated the dignity of people-of-faith by permitting the existence of such inscriptions on the statues of 'Periyar' across the State.
Case Title : Dr. M. Deivanayagam vs Chief Secretary Govt of Tamil Nadu - Diary No 22422/2021