Disposed

M.Vinoth v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC15 May 2019CRL OP/13001/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a petition filed under Section 482 CrPC. It directed the respondent police to grant permission and protection for a cultural program associated with a temple festival, subject to specific conditions ensuring public order and non-political nature, post the election Code of Conduct.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent police to consider fresh representation and grant permission with specific conditions regarding time, content, and no political/communal involvement.

M.Vinoth Vs the Inspector of Police — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED: 15.05.2019

¶3

CORAM:

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

¶5

Crl.O.P.No.13001 of 2019

M.Vinoth

Petitioner

Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Ammapettai Police Station, Ammapettai, Salem District. Respondent

¶10

PRAYER: Petition filed under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code praying to direct the respondent authority to give police protection and permission to conduct Cultural Programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) in the event of Athikaripatti, Adidravidar Colony Arulmigu Sree Sakthi Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District on 17.05.2019 between 06.00 P.M. to 11.00 P.M. by considering the petitioner's representation dated 11.05.2019.

¶11

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to direct the respondent to grant permission to the petitioner for conducting Cultural Programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) on 17.05.2019 between 06.00 P.M. to 11.00 P.M. and give adequate police protection in Athikaripatti, Adidravidar Colony Arulmigu Sree Sakthi Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District.

¶12

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent.

¶13

3.The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the resident of Salem Taluk & District where Athikaripatti, Adidravidar Colony Arulmigu Sree Sakthi Mariamman Temple is situated. The temple festival will be celebrated in a grand manner every year and during the festival, the villagers planned to conduct Cultural Programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) on 17.05.2019 between 06.00 P.M. to 11.00 P.M. In this regard, the

¶14

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

¶15

petitioner gave a representation to the respondent on 11.05.2019. Since no action has been taken, the present petition has been filed.

¶16

4.The learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner would further submit that though they have sought for conducting the programme on 17.05.2019, due to the Code of Conduct regarding the elections, they are prepared to conduct the programmes, after 27th May 2019, when the Code of Conduct comes to an end and would pray that on fresh application being given, the Respondent Police may be directed to consider the same and pass orders on merits and in accordance with law.

¶17

The learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondent, on instructions, would submit that the respondent have no serious objection. She further submitted that permission may be granted subject to stringent conditions.

¶18

Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

¶19

The respondent/The Inspector of Police, Ammapettai Police Station, Ammapettai, Salem District is directed to consider the fresh representation of the petitioner and to give permission and to provide police protection for Cultural Programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) done by Athikaripatti, Adidravidar Colony Arulmigu Sree Sakthi Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District, scheduled to be held after 27th May 2019, subject to the following conditions;

¶20

"(a) Cultural Programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) done by Athikaripatti, Adidravidar Colony Arulmigu Sree Sakthi Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District, scheduled to be held after 27th May 2019, should be completed before 11.00 p.m.

¶21

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

¶22

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(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

¶28

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

¶29

(i) The petitioner as well as the organizers shall give a letter of undertaking agreeing to strictly adhere to the above conditions."

¶30

7.It is open to the respondent/ Inspector of police to impose any further restrictions or conditions purely in the interest of preserving public order and tranquility. There can be a total ban for putting up any Flex Board representing any community, political party or organization.

¶31

8.In the result, this Criminal Original Petition is disposed
of with the above directions. No costs.
s/d-
Assistant Registrar(VO)
True Copy
Sub-Assistant Registrar
ay/mbi
To
1. The Inspector of Police,
Ammapettai Police Station,
Ammapettai,
Salem District.

¶32

The Public Prosecutor High Court, Madras 104. +1 CC to Mr.A.Sathishkumar, Advocate sr 43858.

¶33

Crl.O.P.No.13001 of 2019

¶34

BS(CO) SP(17/05/2019)

¶35

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

M.Vinoth v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Vinoth 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

Kuttiappa Gounder (Died) Vs P.M.Rangasamy

Sridhar Vs State by

O.Subramanian Vs the State by

K.G.Mahendiran Vs the Inspector of Police

Ragu @ Ragavendran Vs State by

Jamuna Vs the Inspector of Police