Allowed

E.Manivannan v. the Inspector of Police

Madras HC22 Feb 2019CRL OP/4819/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners filed writ petitions under Section 482 CrPC seeking permission to conduct five temple festival cultural programs. The Court granted permission, requiring the cultural events to conclude by 10:00 PM, prohibiting obscene or political content, and mandating that no religious or communal harmony be disturbed.

What did the court decide?

Gave permission to conduct cultural programs with conditions limiting time to 6 p.m. to 10 p.m., prohibiting obscene/political content, and allowing police to stop performance on violation.

E.Manivannan Vs the Inspector of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 22.02.2019

¶3

CORAM :

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN

¶5

Crl.O.P.Nos.4819,4823,4827,4825 & 4828 of 2019

¶6

E.Manivannan
..Petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.4819/2019
N.Sakthivel
..Petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.4823/2019
P.Dhanapal
..Petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.4827/2019
R.Vijayakumar ..Petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.4825/2019
K.Rajendiran ..Petitioner in
Crl.O.P.No.4828/2019
Vs
The Inspector of Police,
Anaikattu Police Station,
Anaikattu,
Vellore District. ..Respondent in
Crl.O.P.No.4819/2019
The Inspector of Police,
Velagoundampatti Police Station,
Velagoundampatti,
Namakkal District.
..Respondent in
Crl.O.P.No.4823/2019
The Inspector of Police,
Valapadi Police Station,
Valapadi,
Salem District. ..Respondent in
Crl.O.P.No.4827/2019

¶7

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

¶8

The Inspector of Police, E-4 Kalpakkam Police Station, Kalpakkam, Kanchipuram District

¶9

..Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.4825/2019

¶10

The Inspector of Police, Virinjipuram Police Station, Virinjipuram, Vellore District.

¶11

..Respondent in Crl.O.P.No.4828/2019

¶12

Common Prayer: Criminal Original Petitions are filed under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, to direct the respondent authority to give police protection and permission to conduct Cultural Programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) in the event of (i) Appukkal Arulmigu Sree Annasi Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 27.02.2019 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 18.02.2019 (ii) Vellakalpatti Arulmigu Sree Mariamman Temple Festival at Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District on 27.02.2019 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 18.02.2019 (iii) Thokkiyampalayam Arulmigu Sree Muthaiah & Karuppaiah Temple festival at Valapadi Taluk, Salem District on 13.03.2019 (iv) Puthupakkam, Menavar Kuppam Arulmigu Sree Angalamman Temple festival at Thirukalukundram Taluk, Kanchipuram District on 06.03.2019 (v) Ramapuram Village Arulmigu Sree Nallathai Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 14.03.2019 by considering the petitioner's representation dated 18.02.2019.

¶13

For Petitioners : Mr.A.Sathishkumar

¶14

For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz

¶15

Additional Public Prosecutor

¶16

Seeking permission to conduct cultural programmes in the event of (i) Appukkal Arulmigu Sree Annasi Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 27.02.2019 (ii) Vellakalpatti Arulmigu Sree Mariamman Temple Festival at Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District on 27.02.2019 (iii) Thokkiyampalayam Arulmigu Sree Muthaiah & Karuppaiah Temple festival at Valapadi Taluk, Salem District on 13.03.2019, (iv) Puthupakkam, Menavar Kuppam Arulmigu Sree Angalamman Temple festival at Thirukalukundram Taluk, Kanchipuram District on

¶17

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

¶18

06.03.2019 (v) Ramapuram Village Arulmigu Sree Nallathai Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 14.03.2019 the petitioners made representation dated 18.02.2019 to the respondent. As the same has not been considered, the present Criminal Original petition have been filed.

¶19

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents.

¶20

The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, on instructions, would submit that there is likelihood of arising law and order problem.

¶21

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, these petitions are allowed and the petitioners are permitted to conduct cultural programme in the event of (i) Appukkal Arulmigu Sree Annasi Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 27.02.2019 (ii) Vellakalpatti Arulmigu Sree Mariamman Temple Festival at Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District on 27.02.2019 (iii) Thokkiyampalayam Arulmigu Sree Muthaiah & Karuppaiah Temple festival at Valapadi Taluk, Salem District on 13.03.2019, (iv) Puthupakkam, Menavar Kuppam Arulmigu Sree Angalamman Temple festival at Thirukalukundram Taluk, Kanchipuram District on 06.03.2019 (v) Ramapuram Village Arulmigu Sree Nallathai Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 14.03.2019 however with the following conditions:-

¶22

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the event of (i) Appukkal Arulmigu Sree Annasi Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 27.02.2019 (ii) Vellakalpatti Arulmigu Sree Mariamman Temple Festival at Paramathi Velur Taluk, Namakkal District on 27.02.2019 (iii) Thokkiyampalayam Arulmigu Sree Muthaiah & Karuppaiah Temple festival at Valapadi Taluk, Salem District on 13.03.2019, (iv) Puthupakkam, Menavar Kuppam Arulmigu Sree Angalamman Temple festival at Thirukalukundram Taluk, Kanchipuram District on 06.03.2019 (v) Ramapuram Village Arulmigu Sree Nallathai Amman Temple festival at Anaikattu Taluk, Vellore District on 14.03.2019 shall be conducted between 06.00 p.m. and 10.00 p.m.

¶23

(b)There should not be any kind of obscene dance or vulgar dialogues during the performance, by anyone of the participants. (c) Double meaning songs should not be played so as to spoil the minds of students and youths.

¶24

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

¶25

(e) No flex boards in support of any political party or

¶26

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

¶27

communal leader, shall be erected at the premises of the programme.

¶28

(f) The functions 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 respondent is directed to issue necessary permission, incorporating the above conditions.

¶32

lpp/vsn

¶33

Sd/-

¶34

Assistant Registrar

¶35

//True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar

¶36

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Anaikattu Police Station, Anaikattu, Vellore District. 2. The Inspector of Police, Velagoundampatti Police Station, Velagoundampatti, Namakkal District. 3.The Inspector of Police, Valapadi Police Station, Valapadi, Salem District 4.The Inspector of Police, E-4 Kalpakkam Police Station, Kalpakkam, Kanchipuram District 5.The Inspector of Police, Virinjipuram Police Station, Virinjipuram, Vellore District.

¶37

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

¶38

6.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

¶39

+5cc to Mr.A.Sathish Kumar, Advocate, SR.NO.16714, 16715, 16716 16717 & 16718

¶40

Crl.O.P.Nos.4819,4823,4827,4825 & 4828 of 2019

¶41

kak(25/02/2019)

¶42

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

E.Manivannan v. the Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

E.Manivannan 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.Karthik Vs the State Rep by

Perumal, Aged 70 Years Vs State by

Kaliyaperumal, Vs the Superintendent of Police

R.Swaminathan Vs the State of T.N., Rep.by

S.Felix Edward Vs The Asst. General Manager/

M/s.Myoung Shin Automotives Vs The Superintendent of Police