Allowed

D.Mathesh, v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC1 Apr 2016WP/12182/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court, via a writ petition, allowed a request for permission to conduct a cultural program during a temple festival. The court held that an apprehension of law and order without material evidence is insufficient to deny permission, but imposed conditions on content, political neutrality, and timing.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to conduct the cultural program on 6.4.2016 subject to specific conditions regarding content, timing, and conduct.

D.Mathesh, Vs The Inspector of Police — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 01.04.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

Writ Petition No.12182 of 2016

¶6

D.Mathesh ... Petitioner

¶7

vs. The Inspector of Police, Omallur Police Station, Salem District. ... Respondent

¶8

Writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondent authority to give permission to conduct the cultural program at Omallur Taluk, Salem District, Keezhkamandapatti Arulmighu Sri Sakthi Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha on 6.4.2016 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 28.3.2016.

¶9

For Petitioner : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja For Respondent : Mr.M.Dig Vijaya Pandian, Addl. Govt. Pleader ORDER

¶10

By consent, the main writ petition itself is taken up for final disposal.

¶11

Seeking permission to conduct cultural program on 6.4.2016 at Keezhkamandapatti Arulmighu Sri Sakthi Mariamman Koil, Omallur Taluk, Salem District, the petitioner made a representation dated 28.3.2016 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered so far, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶12

I have heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader, who has taken notice on behalf of the respondent.

¶13

Learned Additional Government Pleader, on instructions, would submit that there is likelihood of law and order problem.

¶14

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶15

A mere apprehension cannot be a ground to reject the representation of the petitioner. There is absolutely no material beforethis Court to hold that there will be a law and order problem in the event of permission being granted.

¶16

In such view of the matter, the writ petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to conduct cultural programme on 6.4.2016 at Keezhkamandapatti Arulmighu Sri Sakthi Mariamman Koil, Omallur Taluk, Salem District, however, with the following conditions:-

¶17

(a) The cultural programme in connection with temple Festival at Keezhkamandapatti Arulmighu Sri Sakthi Mariamman Koil, Omallur Taluk, Salem District, to be held on 6.4.2016 between 06.00 p.m. to 10.30 p.m.

¶18

(b) There should not be any kind of obscene dance or vulgar dialogue during the performance, by anyone of the participants.

¶19

¶20

(d) No dance or songs, touching upon any political party or religion or community or caste be played.

¶21

(e) No flex boards in support of any political party or communal leader be erected.

¶22

(f) The function should not affect either religious or communal harmony and shall be conducted without any discrimination based on caste.

¶23

(g) If there is any violation of any one of the conditions imposed, the concerned police officer is at liberty to take necessary action, as per law and stop such performance; and

¶24

(h) Similarly, the police is entitled to stop the dance programme, if it exceeds beyond the permitted time.

¶25

Further, the respondent is directed to issue necessary permission, incorporating the above conditions. No costs. sbi

¶26

Assistant Registrar(CS-VII)

¶27

True Copy

¶28

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶29

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶30

¶31

The Inspector of Police, Omallur Police Station, Salem District.

¶32

1 cc to Mr.Murugan Raja, Advocate, SR 20588

¶33

1 cc to Govt.Pleader, High Court, Madras SR 20933

¶34

mg(co) prk4/4 W.P.No.12182 of 2016

¶35

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

D.Mathesh, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

D.Mathesh, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Palani Vs The Inspector of Police

M.Uthaman Vs The Inspector General of

V.Anbazhagan Vs Union of India

C.Gunasekeran, Vs The Secretary

S.Sivanesan Vs The Thasildhar

R.Mani, Vs The Inspector of Police