Allowed

R.Moorthy v. the Superintendent of Police

Madras HC10 Jan 2020CRL OP/722/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal original petition seeking direction to the police to grant permission for a cultural programme celebrating MGR's birthday. The court rejected the government's apprehension of law and order without material proof and permitted the event subject to conditions regarding public order, content, and police protection fees.

What did the court decide?

Permission to conduct the cultural programme granted subject to conditions regarding police protection fees, content restrictions, prohibition of flexboards, and time limits.

R.Moorthy Vs the Superintendent of Police — Service and Employment | Madras HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED 10.01.2020 CORAM THE HONOURABLE Mr.JUSTICE P.RAJAMANICKAM CRL.O.P.No.722 of 2020

¶2

R.Moorthy ... Petitioner

¶3

Vs.

¶4

1.The Superintendent of Police, Erode, Erode District.

¶5

2.The Inspector of Police, Malayampalayam Police Station, Erode District. ... Respondents

¶6

PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to issue direction to the second respondent TO GIVE THE BANDOBUST for permission to conduct the cultural programme on 17.01.2020 in the event of Amma Munnetra Kazhagam at Ganapathipalayam, Erode to celebrate the festival for Former Chief Minister MGR Birthday based on the petitioner's representation dated 08.01.2020.

¶7

This petition has been filed to issue direction to the second respondent TO GIVE THE BANDOBUST for permission to conduct the cultural programme on 17.01.2020 in the event of Amma Munnetra Kazhagam at Ganapathipalayam, Erode to celebrate the festival for Former Chief Minister MGR Birthday based on the petitioner's representation dated 08.01.2020.

¶8

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

¶9

The learned Government Advocate, on instructions, would submit that there is likelihood of arising law and order problem.

¶10

1/3

¶11

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

¶12

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 “Amma Munnetra Kazhagam at Ganapathipalayam, Erode to celebrate the festival for Former Chief Minister MGR Birthday”, however with the following conditions:-

¶13

(a) The cultural programme in connection with the event of

¶14

“Amma Munnetra Kazhagam at Ganapathipalayam, Erode to celebrate the festival for Former Chief Minister MGR Birthday”, on 17.01.2020.

¶15

(b) The petitioner shall pay a cost of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees

¶16

Ten Thousand only) to the 2nd respondent police towards police protection.

¶17

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

¶18

dialogues during the performance, by anyone of the participants.

¶19

(d) Double meaning songs should not be played so as to

¶20

spoil the minds of students and youths.

¶21

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

¶22

or religion or community or caste shall be played.

¶23

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

¶24

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

¶25

(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

¶26

(i) Similarly, the police is directed to stop the dance

¶27

programme, if it is played beyond the permitted time limit.

¶28

(j) The 2nd respondent is directed to issue necessary

¶29

permission, incorporating the above conditions.

¶30

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

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

Assistant Registrar(CS VII)

¶33

//True Copy//

¶34

Sub Assistant Registrar

¶35

2/3

¶36

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

¶37

mfa/ah To

¶38

1.The Superintendent of Police, Erode, Erode District. 2.The Inspector of Police, Malayampalayam Police Station, Erode District. 3.The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court, Chennai. +1cc to Mr.R.Gopinath, Advocate sr.2782

¶39

CRL.O.P.No.722 of 2020

¶40

nr 13/01/2020

¶41

3/3

¶42

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

R.Moorthy v. the Superintendent of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Moorthy 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

Gangavani Vs State by

M.Arul Anand Vs State Rep by

M.Yuvaraj Vs State Rep by

K.Murugan Vs the State Rep by

M.Thangaraj Vs State Rep by

B.Ali Hussain Vs The State of Tamil Nadu