Allowed

V.Sudhakar, v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Jun 2017WP/15753/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court permitted the petitioner to conduct a cultural programme during a temple festival on 07.07.2017, accepting an undertaking that no obscene dance or vulgar dialogues would be performed, and directing the respondent to issue permission subject to stringent conditions.

What did the court decide?

Permission to conduct the cultural programme on 07.07.2017 subject to conditions prohibiting obscene dance, vulgar dialogues, and political/religious content; direction to respondent to issue permissi

V.Sudhakar, Vs The Inspector of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.06.2017

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE R.MAHADEVAN

¶5

W.P.No.15753 of 2017

¶6

V.Sudhakar .. Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The Inspector of Police Senthurai Police Station, Senthurai, Ariyalur District. .. Respondent

¶9

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a writ of Mandamus directing the respondent authority to give police protection and permission to conduct the cultural programme (Aadal Padal) in Ponkudikadu Arulmigu Sree Samundeswariamman Temple Festival, at Senthurai Taluk, Ariyalur District on 07.07.2017 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 16.06.2017.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sathishkumar For Respondent : Mr.D.Vairamurthy Special Government Pleader O R D E R

¶11

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme in the Ponkudikadu Arulmigu Sree Samundeswariamman Temple Festival, at Senthurai Taluk, Ariyalur District, on 07.07.2017, the petitioner addressed a representation dated 16.06.2017 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present writ petition has been filed.

¶12

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

¶13

Since this Court, on earlier occasions, has not granted permission to conduct dance programme on the ground that obscene movements are involved in the dance performances, now, learned counsel for the petitioner gave an assurance that no such obscene dance movements will be there in the cultural programme

¶14

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

¶15

to be conducted in the temple festival scheduled to be held on 07.07.2017 and whatever conditions this Court imposes for conducting the cultural programme, the same will be adhered to by the petitioner in letter and spirit.

¶16

In view of the assurance so given by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this writ petition is disposed of, by permitting the petitioner to conduct cultural programme in the Ponkudikadu Arulmigu Sree Samundeswariamman Temple Festival, at Senthurai Taluk, Ariyalur District, scheduled to be held on 07.07.2017, with the following conditions:-

¶17

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the Ponkudikadu Arulmigu Sree Samundeswariamman Temple Festival, at Senthurai Taluk, Ariyalur District, shall be conducted on 07.07.2017, between 06.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m.

¶18

(b) There should not be any kind of obscene dance or vulgar dialogues 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 shall be played.

¶21

(e) No flex boards in support of any political party or communal leader, shall be erected at the premises of the programme.

¶22

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

¶23

(g) If there is 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 forthwith; and

¶24

(h) Similarly, the police is directed to stop the dance programme, if it is conducted beyond the permitted time limit.

¶25

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

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS VI)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

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

¶31

jer

¶32

¶33

The Inspector of Police Senthurai Police Station, Senthurai, Ariyalur District.

¶34

+1cc to M/S.A.Sathish Kumar, Advocate Sr. 43957

¶35

WP.No.15753 of 2017

¶36

KJ(CO)
VR(27/06/2017)

¶37

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

V.Sudhakar, v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Sudhakar, 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

T.M. Chandrasekhara Reddy, Vs the Commissioner of Police

B.Jagan, Aged 27 Yrs, Vs the Inspector of Police

R.Radhakrishnan, Aged 59 Years Vs State Rep. by Its

N.Benjamin Franklin Vs the Sub Inspector of Police

B. Ramaraja, Vs the Station House Officer

Syngenta India Ltd., Vs the State of Tamil Nadu