Supreme Court issues interim order against TM Krishna's recognition as Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi award recipient

On December 16, 2024, the Supreme Court issued an interim order stating that Carnatic musician TM Krishna should not be recognized as the recipient of the Sangita Kalanidhi MS Subbulakshmi Award. This decision came just a day after the Music Academy in Chennai conferred the award upon him. The Court also prohibited Krishna from presenting himself as the recipient of this award in MS Subbulakshmi's name.

The order follows a petition by the grandson of Bharat Ratna MS Subbulakshmi, challenging a previous ruling by the Madras High Court that allowed the Music Academy to confer the prestigious award on TM Krishna. The petitioner argued that Krishna had previously made disrespectful remarks about MS Subbulakshmi.

The bench, comprising Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice SVN Bhatti, emphasized the deep respect and honor commanded by MS Subbulakshmi, a distinguished singer whose legacy continues to inspire. The Court noted that while Krishna's comments might have been intended to show respect, the language used was inappropriate. “The words used by defendant no.4 (TM Krishna) were not in good taste,” the Court observed.

As a result, the Court ruled that Krishna should not be recognized as the recipient of the award and should refrain from projecting himself as such. The interim order clarified that this decision should not reflect negatively on the Music Academy or The Hindu Group, the award's sponsor. “This order should not be seen as a reflection either on the Music Academy or the Hindu Group,” the Court stated.

The controversy stemmed from Krishna's past writings, where he allegedly made derogatory comments about MS Subbulakshmi. Additional Solicitor General N Venkataraman, representing the petitioner, argued that Krishna's remarks were akin to insulting a respected figure, comparing it to awarding a person who insults Mahatma Gandhi. The petition cited Krishna's descriptions of Subbulakshmi as “the greatest hoax of the twentieth century” and “a saintly Barbie doll,” among others.

The legal debate focused on whether the Music Academy and The Hindu Group had the right to confer the award amidst the ongoing legal challenge. Senior Advocate CS Vaidyanathan, representing the Music Academy, argued that the award had already been conferred, making the matter moot. However, Venkataraman insisted the issue was unresolved, referencing an oral remark by the Chief Justice of India that suggested the award could be retracted if the challenge was validated.

The Court noted procedural issues, highlighting that the Music Academy had not properly challenged the initial injunction against the award’s conferment. Justice Bhatti pointed out that the injunction remained valid as the Music Academy did not file the necessary appeal.

Until the matter is resolved, the Court ruled that Krishna should not associate himself with the award in MS Subbulakshmi's name. Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing Krishna, opposed the order, asserting that Krishna was a devoted admirer of Subbulakshmi and his comments aimed to challenge the exaggerated narratives about her.

The Supreme Court’s interim order will remain in effect until the lawsuit regarding Krishna’s recognition as the award recipient is concluded.

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.