The Madras High Court, on Tuesday (August 4), asked the Tamil Nadu police to release the Leader of the Opposition, Udhayanidhi Stalin, who has been arrested by the Thanjavur police in connection with a case for allegedly making derogatory statements against women.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan recorded the submission of Advocate General Vijay Narayan that though Udhayanidhi has been arrested and was being taken to Thanjavur, the State did not intend to remand him. The AG submitted that the State only intended to question Udhayanidhi and release him on station bail after the same.

The court recorded the submission and asked the police to release Udhayanidhi today itself, after interrogation, on station bail. The court also directed Udhayanidhi to cooperate with the investigation as and when necessary.

It may be noted that Udhayanidhi had filed an anticipatory bail petition in the case. However, he was taken into custody from his residence, before it could be taken up.

Following this, Senior Advocate Hasan Mohammad Jinnah and Senior Advocate J Ravindran mentioned the matter in the morning. Considering the urgency, the court had agreed to take up the matter in the post lunch session.

The case has been registered against Udayanidhi by the Thanjavur police for offences under Sections 196 [promoting enmity between different groups], 192 [Wantonly giving provocation with intent to cause riot], 352 [Intentional insult with intent to provoke breach of peace], 79 [Word, gesture or act intended to insult modesty of a woman], 296(b) [obscene act and songs], 61 [criminal conspiracy] and 351(2) [criminal intimidation] of the BNS along with Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Women Act and Section 67 of the IT Act.

The case relates to an alleged objectionable speech made by the Leader of the Opposition during a public rally held by the Dravida Munnetra Kazhagam party in Thanjavur on August 3, in connection with the Cauvery water sharing dispute.

As per reports, Udayanidhi has been arrested by the police, despite the court orally directing the prosecutor to inform the police not to take any action till the anticipatory bail plea was heard by the court.

The remark, which was perceived as a double-entendre, has drawn stark criticism from the ruling Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) party members and other political parties in the State.

In his plea, Udhayanidhi argued that he had not made any derogatory or indecent statements against any person and did not use any word or gesture intended to insult the modesty of any woman. He submitted that the meaning now attributed to his speech was based on interpretations by unknown persons on social media.

It was also argued that the case is politically motivated and is intended to silence him, being the Leader of the Opposition. Udayanidhi argued that the case, filed shortly before the budget session of the State Assembly, was an attempt to keep him away from the House (assembly) during the budget session and prevent him from holding the government accountable. Thus, he alleged that the complaint is driven by political rivalry and not by genuine concerns.

When the matter was heard on Tuesday, the court remarked that the anticipatory bail petition might not be maintainable anymore since Udhayanidhi had already been arrested. However, the court also noted that it had powers to grant bail itself, considering the relevant materials. However, noting that the State did not intend to remand Udhayanidhi, the court refrained from going into the merits of the case.

Counsel for Petitioner: Senior Advocate NR Elango, Senior Advocate Hasan Mohammed Jinnah, Senior Advocate J Ravindra for Mr E Raj Thilak, Mr KMD Muhilan, Mr Aswin Prasanna, Mr S Udayakumar

Counsel for Respondents: Advocate General Vijay Narayan, Senior Advocate Siddharth Dave (for complainant)