Allowed

S.Ganesan, v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC7 Mar 2018CRL OP/7003/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court allowed the petitioner's petition under Section 482 Cr.PC regarding a request to conduct a cultural programme for a temple festival. It granted permission subject to strict conditions including time limits, prohibition of obscene or political content, and assurance of communal harmony.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to conduct cultural programme on 09.03.2018 between 6 PM and 11 PM subject to eight conditions regarding content, time, and communal harmony.

S.Ganesan, Vs the Superintendent of Police — Writ and Judicial Review | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 07.03.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶5

Crl.OP.No.7003 of 2018

S.Ganesan

.. Petitioner

The Superintendent of Police, Salem District, Salem.

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Deevattipatti Police Station,

¶11

Salem District. .. Respondents

¶12

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC, praying to direct the second respondent to give the Bandobust for permission to conduct cultural programme on 09.03.2018 in the event of Deevattipatti Arulmighu Sri Periya Mariamman Koil, Deevattipatti, Salem District on the petitioner's representation dated 19.02.2018.

¶13

For Petitioner : M/s.R.Gopinath

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.C.Raghavan

¶15

Government Advocate (Crl. Side)

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme in the event of Deevattipatti Arulmighu Sri Periya Mariamman Koil, Deevattipatti, Salem District, the petitioner made a representation dated 19.02.2018 to the second respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present criminal original petition has been filed.

¶18

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents.

¶19

Learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side), on instructions, would submit that there is likelihood of arising law and order problem.

¶20

A mere apprehension cannot be a ground to reject the representation. There is absolutely no material before this

¶21

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

¶22

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:-

¶23

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the event of Deevattipatti Arulmighu Sri Periya Mariamman Koil, Deevattipatti, Salem District, shall be conducted on 09.03.2018 between 06.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m.

¶24

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

¶25

¶26

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

¶27

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

¶28

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

¶29

(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

¶30

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

¶31

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

¶32

Assistant Registrar(CS-V)

¶33

True Copy

¶34

Sub-Assistant Registrar

¶35

¶36

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

¶37

¶38

The Superintendent of Police, Salem District, Salem.

¶39

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

¶40

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶41

+1 CC to Mr.R. Gopinath, Advocate sr 17255.
Crl.OP.No.7003 of 2018
VGI(CO)
SP(08/03/2018)

¶42

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

S.Ganesan, v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

S.Ganesan, v. the Superintendent 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.Manjari, Aged 55 Vs State Rep by

Y.Akbar Ahmed, M/37 Years Vs the Deputy Commissioner of

N.Meenakchisundram, Vs Inspector of Police

Selvi, F/a 40 Years, Vs the Inspector of Police

R.Gopikrishnan, M/a 21 Yrs, Vs the Inspector of Police

N.Jayavel Vs The Superintendent of Police