Allowed

K.Manjunathan, v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC17 Mar 2016WP/9905/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Madras High Court allowed a writ petition and granted permission to the petitioner to conduct a cultural programme during a village temple festival, rejecting the respondent's claim of likely law and order issues without material proof. Specific conditions regarding timing, content, and conduct were imposed.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; petitioner permitted to conduct the cultural programme on fixed conditions regarding timing, content, and public order.

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

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 17.03.2016

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE R.SUBBIAH

¶5

W.P.No.9905 of 2016

¶6

K.Manjunathan .. Petitioner

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Inspector of Police, Veppannapalli Police Station, Krishnagiri District. .. Respondent

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to direct the respondent authority to give permission to the petitioner to conduct a cultural programme in Boothimuttal Village, Veppannapalli Sri Kothantaramaswamy Koil Thiruvizha on 24.03.2016 at Boothimuttal Village, Krishnagiri Taluk and District, by considering the petitioner's representation, dated 11.03.2016.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.R.P.Murugan Raja

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.R.A.S.Senthilvel, Addl.G.P.

¶12

ORDER

¶13

Seeking permission to conduct the cultural programme in Boothimuttal Village, Veppannapalli Sri Kothantaramaswamy Temple festival on 24.03.2016 at Boothimuytal Village, Krishnagiri Taluk and District, the petitioner made a representation dated 11.03.2016 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶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 representation. 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 Petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to conduct the cultural programme in Boothimuttal Village,

¶17

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

¶18

Veppannapalli Sri Kothantaramaswamy Temple festival at Boothimuttal Village, Krishnagiri Taluk and District, on 24.03.2016, however, with the following conditions:-

¶19

(a) The cultural programme in Boothimuttal Village, Veppannapalli Sri Kothantaramaswamy Temple festival at Boothimuttal Village, Krishnagiri Taluk and District, which is scheduled to be held on 24.03.2016, should be held between 06.00 p.m. and 10.30 p.m.

¶20

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

¶21

¶22

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

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(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.

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

Assistant Registrar(CS VII)

¶29

//True Copy//

¶30

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶31

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

¶32

Copy to

¶33

The Inspector of Police, Veppannapalli Police Station, Krishnagiri District.

¶34

+1cc to Mr.R.P.MuruganRaja, Advocate, S.R.No.16937 +1cc to the Government Pleader, S.R.No.17434

¶35

W.P.No.9905 of 2016

¶36

ctk(CO)
srg(21/03/2016)

¶37

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

K.Manjunathan, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Manjunathan, 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

C.Nirmala Prasad, 14/6 Vs the Sub Registrar

S.John Bosco Vs the Inspector General of

V.Shanthi, Vs The Principal Secretary to

Sankarappa, Vs The Sub Collector, Hosur

K.Panneerselvam, Vs The Inspector of Police

Ashok Kumar Vs The Inspector of Police