Back
Bombay HC Clears Path for Controversial MLC's Speech in Nanded, Citing Spotless Past Record
In a swift ruling on , the Bench at Aurangabad allowed a public congregation in Biloli, Nanded district, featuring Telangana MLC T. Rajasinh Thakur—popularly known as T Raja, an independent legislator and former BJP member. The of Justice Sandipkumar C. More and Justice Abasaheb D. Shinde quashed a police order denying permission, overriding fears of hate speech and law-and-order disruptions during the Ram Navami festival season. Petitioner Maroti Raosaheb Jadhav challenged the refusal, securing relief with conditions to safeguard communal peace.
Police Red Light, Court Gives Green Signal
The saga began when organizers planned a congregation on , at 6:30 p.m. in Biloli, inviting MLC Thakur as the key speaker. On , the Police Inspector at Biloli station invoked , denying permission. The order flagged Thakur's history of alleged hate speeches stoking Hindu-Muslim tensions and potential unrest in Nanded amid ongoing prohibitory orders under .
Jadhav filed against the State of Maharashtra, District Magistrate Pune (noted erroneously in some records as Pune instead of Nanded), District Superintendent of Police Nanded, and the Biloli Police Inspector. The court admitted and heard the petition finally on the same day, issuing .
Organizers' Bold Bid: Precedents and Promises of Peace
Petitioner's counsel, , argued that similar police refusals in past events—at Chopda (Jalgaon), Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar, Mira-Bhayandar (Mumbai), Pusad, and Yawatmal—were overturned by benches in Nagpur, Mumbai, and Aurangabad. No untoward incidents occurred post those permissions, backed by an affidavit. Kulkarni highlighted prior rulings:
- Criminal Writ Petition No. 369 of 2024 (Anil Subhash Wankhede v. State): Permission granted for Chopda with police conditions.
- Criminal Writ Petition No. 866 of 2025 (Haridas Tulshiram Thackery v. State).
- Criminal Writ Petition No. 594 of 2024 (Naresh Ramu Nile v. State): Allowed Mira-Bhayandar event on Shivaji Jayanti, referencing a , order on rally conditions.
Jadhav offered undertakings—no provocative speeches, full compliance with police terms—and promised Thakur would file the same by .
State's Stern Warning: History of Hate, Risk of Riot
Additional Public Prosecutor countered fiercely, citing Thakur's past hate speeches threatening national integrity and sparking communal FIRs. With prohibitory orders active until March 27 and Ram Navami looming, allowing the event risked breaching peace. The police order explicitly warned: Thakur's reputation for speeches causing Hindu-Muslim rifts could ignite law-and-order issues.
Bench Balances Rights and Risks: Precedents Tip the Scale
The judges meticulously reviewed precedents, noting permissions were granted with safeguards, yielding zero incidents. They distinguished this case: prohibitory orders expired by hearing date, removing barriers. Upholding BNSS Section 168 refusal mechanically ignored judicial history and the clean track record. Echoing guidelines, the bench prioritized conditional permission over blanket bans.
As LiveLaw reports ( ), the ruling underscores that past permissions without mishaps rebut apprehension-based denials.
Key Observations
"It is extremely important to note that not a single untoward incident had taken place in the aforesaid incidents, wherein permission to MLC T. Rajasinh Thakur for addressing the congregation was granted."
"The petitioner has even filed an affidavit to that effect before this Court. Today, the petitioner has filed written undertaking that in the forthcoming congregation dated 04.04.2026 no inflammatory or provocative speeches which may disturb communal harmony or public peace, shall be delivered."
"Considering all these aspects and in the light of earlier judgments of this Court as well as the guidelines of the, it would be appropriate to allow the petition..."
Verdict Unlocks the Venue—with Ironclad Checks
The petition succeeded decisively:
"(i) Criminal Writ Petition is hereby allowed.
(ii) Thedated 17.03.2026 is hereby.
(iii) Respondents No.4... shall grant permission... by imposing necessary conditions...
(iv) T. Rajasinh Thakur... shall also file similar undertaking..."
Biloli police must issue a fresh order promptly, imposing "necessary and appropriate conditions" for the April 4 event. Thakur and organizers bear responsibility for peace.
This sets a precedent: Courts may override police fears if history shows compliance, but undertakings remain non-negotiable. Future permissions for polarizing speakers hinge on such safeguards, potentially easing—but conditioning—free speech in tense zones.
