Allowed

M.Arul Anand v. State Rep by

Madras HC9 Jan 2020CRL OP/418/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed a Crl. O.P. filed under Section 482 CrPC, directing the police to permit a cultural programme during a temple festival. The court rejected mere apprehension of law and order without material evidence but imposed specific conditions regarding content, time, and police costs.

What did the court decide?

Permission granted to conduct cultural programme on 17.01.2020 subject to conditions including payment of Rs. 10,000 for police protection and restrictions on content and time.

M.Arul Anand Vs State Rep by — Public Procurement and Tenders | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED 09.01.2020

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM CRL.O.P.No.418 of 2020

¶5

M.Arul Anand ... Petitioner

¶6

Vs.

¶7

State Rep. by The Inspector of Police, Kondalampatti Police Station, Kondalampatti, Salem District.

¶8

.. Respondent

¶9

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to direct the respondent authority to give police protection and permission to conduct Cultural programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) in the event of P.Nattamangalam Arulmigu Sree Thana Valarntha Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District on 17.01.2020 between 06.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.01.2020.

¶10

For Petitioner : Mr.A.Sathishkumar

¶11

For Respondent : Mr.M.Mohamed Riyaz, Additional Public Prosecutor

¶12

- - - - O R D E R

¶13

This petition has been filed to direct the respondent authority to give police protection and permission to conduct Cultural programme (Adal Padal Nigalchi) in the event of P.Nattamangalam Arulmigu Sree Thana Valarntha Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District on 17.01.2020 between 06.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m. by considering the petitioner's representation dated 04.01.2020.

¶14

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

¶15

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

¶16

The learned Government Advocate, on instructions, would submit 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 petitioner is permitted to conduct cultural programme in the event of “P.Nattamangalam Arulmigu Sree Thana Valarntha Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District”, however with the following conditions:-

¶18

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the event of “P.Nattamangalam Arulmigu Sree Thana Valarntha Mariamman Temple Festival at Salem Taluk & District”, on 17.01.2020 from 06.00 p.m. to 11.00 p.m.

¶19

(b) The petitioner shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) to the respondent police towards police protection.

¶20

(c)There should not be any kind of obscene dance or vulgar

¶21

dialogues during the performance, by anyone of the participants.

¶22

(d) Double meaning songs should not be played so as to spoil the minds of students and youths.

¶23

(e) No dance or songs, touching upon any political party

¶24

or religion or community or caste shall be played.

¶25

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

¶26

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

¶27

(h) 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

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

¶29

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

¶30

5.With the above directions, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶33

//True Copy//

¶34

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶35

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

¶36

vv/ah To

¶37

1.The Inspector of Police, Kondalampatti Police Station, Kondalampatti, Salem District.

¶38

2.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai.

¶39

+1cc to Mr.A.Sathishkumar , Advocate SR.No. 2368 CRL.O.P.No.418 of 2020

¶40

A.SK(10/01/2020)

¶41

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

M.Arul Anand v. State Rep by

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M.Arul Anand v. State Rep by

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

Kumbakonathar@ Karunakaran Vs State Rep by

K.Vijayakumar Vs State Rep. by

S.Manoharan Vs State Rep. by

Gangavani Vs State by

M.Yuvaraj Vs State Rep by

Nagarajan Vs the Superintendent of Police