February 24, 2026 : Justice G.R. Swaminathan of the Madras High Court has once again drawn public attention following remarks made at a private religious event, where he criticised rationalists who equate reverence for spiritual gurus with superstition.

Speaking in Tamil at the “Guru Vandanam Utsavam” organised by the Hosur Satsangh at a private educational institution in Hosur, the judge observed that those who label devotees as fools, incompetent, or barbaric for regarding gurus as equivalent to God were themselves deserving of the same description. He distinguished between the divine as an abstract metaphysical concept and the Guru as its living, tangible embodiment. According to him, a Guru carries a positive spiritual presence capable of dispelling negativity in those who come into close contact.

Justice Swaminathan also shared a personal account from a late-night journey with his spouse after attending their daughter’s convocation in Punjab. He described navigating dense fog and a sudden tyre puncture, which left him feeling momentarily helpless. He said that invoking his spiritual guide during the episode gave him composure and inner strength, deepening his faith in the Guru’s protective grace.

Although the speech was delivered in a personal capacity at a private function, it has prompted discussion on the permissible limits of extra-judicial expression by members of the higher judiciary.

Judges are entitled to the freedoms of speech and religion under Articles 19(1)(a) and 25 of the Constitution. However, these rights operate within the broader framework of judicial ethics, constitutional morality, and the expectation of institutional neutrality.

Justice Swaminathan has earlier made public remarks referencing Sanatana Dharma and the place of spiritual tradition in public life, which had also attracted debate. His recent comments have revived questions about how members of the judiciary balance personal belief with the institutional obligation of restraint.