Allowed

P.N.Rajkumar A/43 Yrs v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC26 Mar 2018CRL OP/9443/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed a criminal original petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC by P.N.Rajkumar seeking permission to conduct a cultural programme at a temple in Namakkal. The Court held that mere apprehension of law and order is insufficient to deny permission and directed the respondent to grant permission subject to several conditions regarding content, timing, and public order.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to conduct cultural programme subject to conditions including time limits, prohibition of obscene/political content, and issuance of necessary protection.

P.N.Rajkumar A/43 Yrs Vs the Inspector of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED:26.03.2018

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE M.S.RAMESH

¶5

Crl.OP.No.9443 of 2018

¶6

P.N.Rajkumar .. Petitioner

¶7

¶8

The Inspector of Police, Pallipalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. .. Respondent

¶9

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 Cr.PC, praying to direct the respondent to give protection and permission to conduct cultural programme (Aadal Paadal) at Veppatai Arulmigu Sri Muniyappan Swamy Kovil Thiruvizha, at No.333/1, Porasakadu, Patharai, Southapuram Post, Kumarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District on 08.04.2018 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 21.03.2018.

¶10

For Petitioner : M/s.V.Ravichandran

¶11

For Respondent : Ms.V.Saratha Devi Government Advocate (Crl.side) O R D E R

¶12

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programme in the event of Veppatai Arulmigu Sri Muniyappan Swamy Kovil Thiruvizha, at No.333/1, Porasakadu, Patharai, Southapuram Post, Kumarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District, the petitioner made a representation dated 21.03.2018 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present criminal original petition has been filed.

¶13

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

¶14

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

¶15

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

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

¶17

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the event of Veppatai Arulmigu Sri Muniyappan Swamy Kovil Thiruvizha, at No.333/1, Porasakadu, Patharai, Southapuram Post, Kumarapalayam Taluk, Namakkal District, shall be conducted on 08.04.2018 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 played beyond the permitted time limit.

¶25

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

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Assistant Registrar(CS III)

¶28

//True Copy//

¶29

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶30

ub/klt

¶31

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

¶32

¶33

The Inspector of Police, Pallipalayam Police Station, Namakkal District. .

¶34

The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶35

+1cc to M/s.V.Ravichandran, Advocate, S.R.No.22893

¶36

Crl.OP.No.9443 of 2018
CS/02/04/18

¶37

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

P.N.Rajkumar A/43 Yrs v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

P.N.Rajkumar A/43 Yrs 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

K.Sudhakar, Vs State Rep. by

S.Indira Vs the Inspector of Police

Mrs.G.Pachaiammal, Vs the State Rep. by

Saravanan, M/A.50 Years Vs State Rep by Its

C.Murugesan, Aged 44 Years Vs the Superintendent of Police

Mrs.S.Sunitha, Aged 28 Years Vs State Rep. by