Allowed

V.Kailash, Aged 35 Years, v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Feb 2018CRL OP/5378/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allowed a Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.Pc seeking police protection and permission for a cultural programme. The Court held that apprehension alone is insufficient to deny permission and directed the respondent to grant it subject to conditions regarding time, content, and harmony.

What did the court decide?

The petitioner was permitted to conduct the cultural programme on 04.04.2018 subject to conditions regarding time, content, events, and police protection.

V.Kailash, Aged 35 Years, Vs the Inspector of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 22.02.2018

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶6

Crl.O.P.No.5378 of 2018

¶7

V.Kailash .. Petitioner Vs The Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station, Namakkal District – 637 401. .. Respondent

¶8

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC, praying to direct the respondent authority to give police protection and permission to conduct cultural programme (Adal Padal) at Muthukalipatii Mariamman Temple Festival, at Rasipuram Taluk & Namakkal District by considering the petitioner's representation dated 17.02.2018.

¶9

For Petitioner : M/S.R.P.Murugan Raja
For Respondent : Mr.C.Raghavan
Government Advocate (Crl.side)
O R D E R

¶10

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme in the event of Muthukalipatii Mariamman Temple Festival, at Rasipuram Taluk & Namakkal District, the petitioner made a representation dated 17.02.2018 to the respondent.

¶11

As the same has not been considered, the present criminal original petition has been filed.

¶12

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶13

¶14

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent.

¶15

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit

¶16

that there is likelihood of arising law and order problem.

¶17

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 criminal original petition is allowed and the petitioner is permitted to conduct cultural programme , however, with the following conditions:-

¶18

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the event of Muthukalipatii Mariamman Temple Festival, at Rasipuram Taluk & Namakkal District, shall be conducted on 04.04.2018 between 06.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m.

¶19

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

¶20

¶21

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

¶22

http://www.judis.nic.in

¶23

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

(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

¶27

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

¶28

(i) The respondent is directed to issue necessary protection and permission, incorporating the above conditions.

¶29

22.02.2018

¶30

Index : Yes/No AT

¶31

Note : Issue order copy on 02.03.2018

¶32

http://www.judis.nic.in

M.S.RAMESH, J.

The Inspector of Police, Rasipuram Police Station, Namakkal District – 637 401.

¶38

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶39

Crl.O.P.No.5378 of 2018

¶40

22.02.2018

¶41

http://www.judis.nic.in

V.Kailash, Aged 35 Years, v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

V.Kailash, Aged 35 Years, 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.S.Ravi, M/57 Vs State by

V.Sekar, M/a 51 Years, Vs State Rep.by

C.Vishal Kumar, M/23 Vs the Commissioner of Police

Seshadri, M/a 30 Yrs, Vs the Superintendent of Police

C.Srithar, S/O.Chandran, Vs the Inspector of Police

Ganesan, M/a 45 Yrs, Vs the Inspector of Police