TN legal fraternity defends Madras HC judge in impeachment dock
Justice GR Swaminathan defends his Karthigai Deepam judgment, asserting it's based on legal reasoning, not personal ideology, amid impeachment motions.
Justice GR Swaminathan stands by his judgement, on the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam lamp in Thiruparankundram hill, based on legal reasoning and it is not influenced by his personal ideology, said a person who has closely worked with the judge for several years.
The judgements, public speeches, political affiliations and the very identity of justice Swaminathan of the Madurai bench of the Madras high court have come under the national spotlight after 107 INDIA bloc MPs moved an impeachment motion against him on Tuesday, questioning his impartiality and political ideology. This follows his controversial judgment on the lighting of a lamp atop a pillar in the Thiruparankundram hill near a dargah in Madurai district.
“There isn’t a single case he has brought in his personal ideology. His comments may have an ideological flavour that has shaped his personality but not his judgments.” The person was referring to justice Swaminathan’s order on the lamp issue when the DMK-ruled state defied his previous order. The judge had said then, “I am not here to throw up my hands and helplessly cry O Father, Forgive Them, for they do not know what they are doing.”
He cited the case of justice Swaminathan standing by acclaimed Tamil author Perumal Murugan in 2015 when he faced backlash from Hindutva groups for his novel Madhorubhagan. Justice Swaminthan noted in the case that caste and religion made for a deadly cocktail over literary freedom. “He has not favoured anyone. The data will show that,” the person quoted above said. Two years later, in 2017, he was elevated as a judge of the Madras high court.
The ruling DMK coalition’s position is that his judgement challenges a century old practice where the lamp was lit in the Uchi Pillaiyar temple during Karthigai Deepam festival and when changed that could cause divisions among Hindus and Muslims who have been peacefully co-existing here. The defiance led to protests by right wing groups, arrests, prohibitory orders and a political flashpoint in Tamil Nadu ahead of the 2026 assembly elections in the state that has culminated in the impeachment petition. “In any similar temple across Tamil Nadu, the lamp is lit on the hilltop. It’s not lit in the middle of the hill which is what is happening here for 100 years because they had to compromise as the hilltop came to be occupied by the dargah,” the person quoted first said citing the example of the Maha Deepam, a giant lamp lit atop the Arunachala Hill in Tiruvannamalai for the same Karthigai Deepam festival.
The DMK ruled state which defied his order and were pulled up for contempt and have now moved the Supreme Court on the issue and their MPs along with allies have moved the impeachment motion.
“A writ petition came to his bench, heard both sides and passed an order that was within his domain, jurisdiction and the only remedy available was to go to a division bench. Going beyond that and seeking an impeachment is a brazen assault on judicial independence. It’s not healthy,” a second judge noted.
The contempt against the DMK government came up thrice before justice Swaminathan when President of the Supreme Court Bar Association, Vikas Singh asked for an adjournment. Justice Swaminathan was also inclined to adjourn the matter but when he knew that around 1.30pm a letter was submitted in the Parliament, he issued summons to the chief secretary and other state officials and set a wider context questioning if there was a minority appeasement that was going on, said a second person who was closely in the know of the proceedings. This person too cited a case in 2020 of justice Swaminathan ordering the release of members of the Tablighi Jamaat to leave to their natives after they were widely accused of spreading the virus during the COVID-19 pandemic where he said these are individuals who needed empathy and not to be viewed as criminals.
But this isn’t the first time that justice Swaminathan has faced criticism. In 2022, he jailed whistleblower turned YouTuber A ‘‘Savukku’ Shankar on charges of contempt of court for attributing motives to justice and vilifying the judiciary. But, in other cases against Shankar in 2024 and 2025, justice Swaminathan also ordered his bail and quashed preventive detention against him.
Earlier in July, justice Swaminathan confronted advocate S Vanchinathan for accusing him of casteist and communal bias in his judicial duties before referring the matter to the bench of the Chief Justice of the Madras high court. Vanchinathan had sent a complaint to the Chief Justice of India (CJI) in June alleging Swaminathan of caste bias and ideological misconduct and sought an enquiry. On July 24, the bench called Vanchinathan to ask if he stood by his comments. Vanchinathan, in turn, sought a written enquiry from the bench. In an escalating courtroom drama in the state between judicial members, Justice Swaminathan who was sharing the bench with Justice K Rajasekar said that they do not know the basis for such allegations. “I don’t know who called you all revolutionary. You are all comedy pieces,” justice Swaminathan said according to Bar and Bench while presiding over the case.
The other public speech of his that has caught attention following the impeachment motion is of him narrating a road accident case and concluded: That day I realised that if we protect the Vedas, the Vedas will protect us. “He spoke to children of the pathshalas based on what was relevant to them and he stands by that too. He narrated a personal experience and nothing was wrong with it,” the person quoted first said. On the INDIA bloc’s accusation that the judge is acting along the interests of the RSS, the ideological fount of the ruling BJP, the person did not wish to comment but said, “Amit Shah defended him so it’s natural to think he has the support of the BJP.”
Justice Swaminathan hails from Thiruvarur in Tamil Nadu. He enrolled as an advocate in 1991 and began practising independently in Puducherry in 1997 before moving to Madurai in 2004 when a bench of the Madras High Court was established there. Retired judge D Hariparanthaman on Wednesday accused justice Swaminthan of bias and asked for the Thirupurankundram case to be transferred to another bench.
“Just because he is Hindu and from the Brahmin community, he won’t be wishy washy if he has to take a stand against another religion solely as per law,” said the second person in the know of work.
