Allowed

C.Vasantha Kumar v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Feb 2016WP/4077/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court allowed two writ petitions seeking permission to conduct cultural programmes during temple festivals. The Court held that mere apprehension without material evidence of law and order problems is insufficient to reject the request. Permission was granted subject to specific conditions regarding time, content, and community harmony.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to conduct cultural programmes between 06:00 p.m. and 10:30 p.m. on specified dates subject to conditions prohibiting obscenity, politics, and ensuring communal harmony.

C.Vasantha Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Madras HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 03.02.2016

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

W.P.Nos.4077 and 4078 of 2016

¶6

C.Vasantha Kumar .. Petitioner in W.P.No.4077 of 2016 R.Karuppanna Gounder .. Petitioner in W.P.No.4078 of 2016

¶7

Vs. The Inspector of Police, Chittode Police Station, Erode District. .. Respondent in W.P.No.4077 of 2016 The Inspector of Police Pallipalayam Police Station, Namakkal District .. Respondent in W.P.No.4078 of 2016

¶8

Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondents respectively authority to give permission to conduct the cultural programmes at Kumizhanparappu Sri Punkuzhali Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha and at Lakshmipalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha respectively on 04.02.2016 and 05.02.2016 respectively by considering the petitioners representations dated 30.01.2016 respectively.

¶9

For Petitioners : Mr..R.P.Murugan Raja For respondents : Mr.S.Navaneethan Addl.Govt.Pleader

¶10

With the consent of both sides, these Writ Petitions are taken up for final disposal.

¶11

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programmes on 04.02.2016 and 05.02.2016 respectively at Kumizhanparappu Sri Punkuzhali Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha and at Lakshmipalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha respectively, the petitioners have made a representation dated 30.01.2016 respectively to the respondents respectively. As the same has

¶12

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

¶13

not been considered, the present writ petitions have been filed.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶15

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

¶16

A mere apprehension cannot be a ground to reject the representations. There is absolutely no material before this Court to hold that there will be a law and order problem in the event of permission being granted. In such view of the matter, the writ petitions are allowed and the petitioners are permitted to conduct cultural programmes on 04.02.2016 and 05.02.2016 at Kumizhanparappu Sri Punkuzhali Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha and at Lakshmipalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha respectively, however, with the following conditions:-

¶17

(a) The cultural programmes in connection with temple Festival at Kumizhanparappu Sri Punkuzhali Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha and at Lakshmipalayam Arulmighu Sri Mariamman Koil Thiruvizha respectively to be held on 04.02.2016 and at 05.2.2016 respectively between 06.00 p.m. to 10.30 p.m respectively.

¶18

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

¶19

(c)Double meaning songs should not be played so as to spoil the minds of students and youths.

¶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

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

¶26

(i)The respondents are directed to issue necessary permission, incorporating the above conditions. No costs.

¶27

Sd/-Sd/-
Asst.Registrar (CO)
/true copy/
Sub Asst. Registrar
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Chittode Police Station,
Erode District.
2. The Inspector of Police
Pallipalayam Police Station,
Namakkal District
+2 ccs to Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja Advocate sr.7083 & 7084
+2 ccs to Government Pleader sr.7184 & 7185
W.P.Nos.4077 and 4078 of 2016.
aa04/02/2016

¶28

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

C.Vasantha Kumar v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

C.Vasantha Kumar 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sivakami Vs the State Rep by

A.Karthikeyan Vs The Sub Registrar

M.Kalai Selvan Vs The State of Tamilnadu

K.Kathirvel Vs The Managing Director

G.Sekar, S/o.Gothandan, Vs The Secretary

M.Jayakumar Vs The Passport Officer