New Delhi, Jan 28 (NationPress) The Supreme Court on Wednesday issued a notice in a public interest litigation (PIL) aimed at securing urgent measures to safeguard the judiciary's independence and to deter the intimidation and communalisation of judicial orders. This comes on the heels of recent judgments by Justice G.R. Swaminathan from the Madras High Court, which allowed the time-honored Deepam ceremony at the Thiruparankundram temple in Madurai, Tamil Nadu.

A Bench composed of Justices Aravind Kumar and P.B. Varale has requested responses from the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary, the Director General of Police (DGP), and the Commissioner of Police in Chennai regarding the matter.

“Issue notice. The learned standing counsel for the State of Tamil Nadu acknowledges receipt of notice and is allowed to submit a status report concerning any steps taken in response to representations made by the petitioner-in-person,” ordered the Justice Kumar-led Bench, scheduling further discussions for February 2 (Monday).

The PIL, submitted by advocate G.S. Mani under Article 32 of the Constitution, clarified that it was not intended to defend any specific judge, but rather “to uphold the institution of judiciary, ensure the rule of law, prevent communal polarisation, and guarantee uniform implementation of constitutional standards nationwide.”

Pointing to the uproar following Justice Swaminathan’s directives concerning the Thiruparankundram Deepam ceremony, the petitioner contends that extensive public reactions—including political statements, protests, lawyer demonstrations, and social media campaigns—have “exceeded the constitutionally acceptable boundaries of criticism and crossed into scandalising the judiciary, communalising judicial acts, and disrupting justice administration.”

The petition emphasizes that judges should not face pressure through street protests or online hostility regarding their judicial choices, asserting that “the only constitutionally recognized remedy against a judicial decision is through appeal, review, or other lawful avenues.”

The PIL warns that permitting such campaigns against active judges could create a “chilling effect” on judicial independence and dissuade judges from performing their duties without fear.

The plea highlights that presenting a judicial ruling as religiously motivated “diminishes public confidence in constitutional courts and empowers mob-driven justice,” hence posing a genuine and imminent risk to public order and communal harmony in Tamil Nadu.

Despite existing legal frameworks under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Information Technology Act, and the Contempt of Courts Act, the petitioner claims that no effective preventive or corrective measures have been implemented to curb unlawful gatherings near Madras High Court or online hate speech targeting Justice Swaminathan, a constitutional authority.

The petitioner noted that comprehensive representations were submitted to the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary, Home Secretary, DGP, senior police officials, and the Registrar General of the Madras High Court, but “to date, there has been no reply, response, or action” concerning these representations.

Seeking the apex court's intervention, the PIL calls for directions to prohibit unlawful protests against courts and judges, protect judicial independence from political and communal pressures, ensure action against hate speech and the communalisation of judicial rulings, and direct law enforcement to maintain public order and constitutional integrity.