A political storm erupted in Tamil Nadu on Tuesday after state minister S Regupathy criticized a recent Madras High Court verdict concerning traditional customs at the Thiruparankundram temple in Madurai. The verdict, which upheld the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam lamp, has been a focal point of religious and political debate, drawing sharp reactions from both state and central leaders.

Minister Regupathy Criticizes Verdict

Regupathy described the high court ruling as “legally incorrect”, arguing that it undermined established traditional practices. Speaking to reporters, he said, “A dead body can be cremated only in a crematorium. Can it be cremated elsewhere? Do not change the existing customs and practices. Why attempt to create confusion in Tamil Nadu by delivering such a judgment?”

The minister confirmed that the Tamil Nadu government plans to appeal the high court’s ruling, which had upheld a single bench order allowing devotees to light the Karthigai Deepam lamp, a centuries-old practice associated with Lord Murugan at Thiruparankundram. His comments triggered accusations of anti-Hindu bias, with opponents suggesting that his stance prioritizes legal formalism over centuries-old religious traditions.

Union Minister Piyush Goyal Weighs In

Union minister Piyush Goyal publicly criticized the DMK government for its opposition to the verdict, alleging that it reflected an “anti-Hindu” sentiment. Speaking to the media, Goyal said, “The Tamil Nadu high court’s division bench order has given justice to the devotees to this old and ancient temple where Lord Murugan resides and for centuries, lamps have been lit for Lord Kartikeya.”

He accused the state administration of appeasement politics, claiming that by appealing the judgment, it went against both the court’s ruling and the sentiments of Hindu devotees. Goyal emphasized that the ruling recognized a long-standing religious practice, stating, “Justice Swaminathan permitted the carrying out of the practice of lighting the lamp. It is extremely unfortunate that the state went in appeal against the judge’s order, reflecting an anti-Hindu mindset.”

BJP and DMK Exchange Barbs

The controversy quickly escalated into a political confrontation between the BJP and DMK. BJP spokesperson Narayanan Tirupathy demanded the immediate removal of Regupathy from the cabinet, calling his remarks “a curse for Tamil Nadu”. Tirupathy argued that the minister’s comments were divisive and threatened communal harmony.

The DMK, however, defended its ministerial colleague. Advocate and DMK spokesperson A Saravanan said, “The petitioner’s actions are not guided by devotion but by naked political ambitions.” The party maintained that the appeal was a legal step, not a stance against religious traditions.

Public Reaction and Celebrations

Despite the political wrangling, BJP leaders and devotees marked the court’s verdict with celebrations. Former governor of Telangana and Puducherry, Tamilisai Soundarajan, described how supporters attempted to light the Karthigai Deepam lamp at their homes in observance of the ruling.

She highlighted the heavy police presence, saying, “So, if we light the lamp itself, so many policemen want to surround us. That itself shows how they are fearing the BJP. We have celebrated the basic right of the Hindus that has been respected, and we thank the court for respecting the sentiments of the Hindus.”

BJP leaders urged citizens to mark the occasion by lighting lamps at home, emphasizing the vindication of a centuries-old tradition. Meanwhile, critics alleged that the celebration was politically motivated, aimed at leveraging the court ruling to consolidate support ahead of elections.

The High Court Verdict

The Madras High Court division bench upheld a single bench order allowing the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam lamp at Thiruparankundram. The ruling was intended to protect traditional Hindu practices while providing legal clarity regarding the temple’s customs. The verdict has sparked debate on how the judiciary intersects with religious and cultural practices, raising questions about state intervention in age-old customs.

The judgment explicitly recognized the rights of devotees to perform long-standing religious rituals, including the ceremonial lighting of the lamp. The court also underscored the importance of preserving cultural traditions while balancing legal compliance.

Political and Cultural Implications

Regupathy’s criticism reflects a broader tension in Tamil Nadu politics, where the DMK government’s actions are perceived by some as prioritizing legal formalities and administrative protocols over traditional religious sentiments. The BJP has seized on the controversy to position itself as the protector of Hindu traditions, arguing that the ruling reflects a historic cultural practice being validated by the courts.

The political fallout highlights the sensitivity of religious issues in Tamil Nadu, where historical and cultural practices intersect with electoral strategies. The controversy over the Thiruparankundram verdict has become emblematic of larger questions about state policy, religious freedom, and the judiciary’s role in safeguarding tradition.

Looking Ahead

The Tamil Nadu government’s appeal against the verdict will determine the next phase of this debate. The BJP has vowed to ensure that the court ruling is respected and that devotees continue to practice their traditions. At the same time, the DMK faces criticism for allegedly fostering anti-Hindu sentiment, while also defending its minister and administrative procedures.

As political rhetoric intensifies, the public and religious leaders remain focused on preserving temple customs and ensuring that centuries-old rituals like the Karthigai Deepam lighting are uninterrupted. The coming weeks may see further legal and political developments, as the state government navigates the delicate balance between law, politics, and cultural heritage.

In summary, the controversy surrounding S Regupathy’s remarks and the Thiruparankundram verdict has ignited a significant debate over religious tradition, judicial authority, and political responsibility in Tamil Nadu. With BJP celebrations, DMK defenses, and public interest, the issue underscores the complex interplay between politics and religion in contemporary state governance.

---