While rejecting his plea to condone his absence from court on August 6, Judge C Sundarapandian, VII Metropolitan Magistrate (FAC), George Town, noted that the Madras High Court had dismissed Ponmudy's challenge to the magistrate's cognisance order in July. The judged pointed out that the High Court had directed the trial court to complete the trial within six months.

Adding that his absence would hinder the proceedings, the judge issued the non-bailable warrant against Ponmudy.

The case stems from suo motu proceedings initiated by the Madras High Court. Those proceedings were later closed after the then DMK-run State government informed the court that the complaints had been investigated and closed for want of material, while granting liberty to the complainants to approach the jurisdictional magistrate.

Later, Uma Anandan of the BJP, a Greater Chennai Corporation councillor, filed a private complaint under the relevant provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS). Finding a prima facie case, the Metropolitan Magistrate took cognisance of the complaint and issued summons to Ponmudy.

Aggrieved by the cognisance order and the summons, Ponmudy filed a criminal revision case before the High Court. By an order dated July 2, the High Court dismissed the petition, noting that Ponmudy had deliberately and maliciously insulted the Hindu religion, its customs, practices and beliefs, thereby outraging the religious feelings of Hindus.

Despite being fully aware that his speech would reach a wider audience through social and electronic media, he intentionally made the remarks to promote atheist ideology, and tarnish and degrade those who did not subscribe to his ideology, the judge had said.