SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2013 Supreme(Mad) 3571

Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
N. KIRUBAKARAN, J.
S. Sivakumar & Others
Versus
The State of Tamilnadu rep. by its Home Secretary & Others
W.P.(MD). Nos. 13607, 14198 & 14287 of 2013 W.P.(MD) No.13607 of 2013 W.P.(MD) No.14198 of 2013 W.P.(MD) No.14287 of 2013
Decided On : 10-09-2013

Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioners:T. Lajapathi Roy, W. Peter Rameshkumar for M.R. Murugappan, K.R. Laxman, Advocates.
For the Respondents:Aayiram K. Selvakumar, Govt. Advocate.

The main legal point established in the judgment is the need for reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights in the interest of public order, as well as the state's power to impose such restrictions. The judgment also emphasizes the importance of assessing the ground reality and the potential for intrinsically dangerous public interest, while highlighting the principles of least invasiveness.

Headnote:

Leaders' Celebrations - Public Order - Prohibition of Celebrations - [MAHATMA GANDHI] - [Public Order] - [Section 144 Cr.P.C., Article 19(2) of the Constitution] - The court discussed the prohibition of celebrations of leaders' birthdays due to public order concerns, citing Section 144 Cr.P.C. and Article 19(2) of the Constitution. It highlighted the need for reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights and the state's power to impose such restrictions in the interest of public order. The court emphasized the importance of assessing the ground reality and the potential for intrinsically dangerous public interest, as well as the need to keep in mind the principles of least invasiveness. The judgment also outlined guidelines for the respondents to follow in managing the celebrations to safeguard public interest.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved writ petitions seeking permission for celebrations and police protection for the birthdays of certain leaders. The celebrations were associated with communal and caste-based tensions, leading to public order concerns. The court considered the past violent incidents and the potential for law and order problems during the celebrations.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the celebrations posed a risk to public order and safety, as evidenced by past violent incidents and the potential for communal tension. It concluded that the restrictions imposed by the respondents were justified in the interest of public order and could not be deemed to violate the fundamental rights of the petitioners.

Issues: The main issues revolved around the permission for celebrations, police protection, and the imposition of restrictions by the respondents due to public order concerns. The court also addressed the role of political and communal leaders in the celebrations and the potential for disturbances and communal tension.

Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the assessment of the ground reality, past violent incidents, and the potential for law and order problems during the celebrations. It emphasized the need for reasonable restrictions on fundamental rights in the interest of public order and highlighted the state's power to impose such restrictions. The judgment also outlined specific guidelines for the respondents to manage the celebrations and safeguard public interest.

Final Decision: The writ petitions were dismissed, and the court provided guidelines for the respondents to follow in managing the celebrations to safeguard public interest. It emphasized the need to reduce the celebrations to low-key affairs, prohibit hate speeches and objectionable slogans, and prevent the assembly of more persons to avoid law and order problems.

Judgment :

1. “MAHATMA GANDHI” is the only leader, who has not been given caste colour. It is very unfortunate, invariably, all other leaders, one way or other, are identified with the castes and religious. All these tall leaders are sought to be reduced as caste leaders, which, they would not have dreamt of during their life time.

2. In all thee writ petitions, the common issue is only with regard to celebrations connected to “Maamannar Poolithevan” “Thiyagi Immanuvel Sekaranar” and “Ondi Veeran”.

3. W.P.No. 13607 of 2013 is to forbear the respondents from preventing the members of the petitioners movement residing all over Ramanathapuram District, from hiring private vehicles to go to the place Ondiveeran-memorial in Tirunelveli District and consequently direct the respondents to grant permission and to provide police protection to participate in the said function on 20.8.2013.

4. W.P.No. 14198 of 2013 is to direct the respondents to provide adequate police protection, drinking water facilities, sanitary facilities to the people who come to Paramakudi, Ramanathapuram District on 11.9.2013 from various parts of Tamil Nadu and provide parking lots to the vehicles including hires vehicles on which people come there for paying homage to their community leader Thiyagi Immanuvel Sekaranan at memorial place.

5. W.P.No. 14287/2013 is to direct the respondents to grant permission and adequate police protection for the celebration of 298th Birth Anniversary of “Maamannar Poolithevan” at Tirunelveli District on 1.9.2013 to be conducted by the petitioner.

6. The common thread in all the above writ petitions are seeking permission to hire vehicles and to travel respective memorials of their leaders and conduct meeting and for police protection. The petitioners contend that their respective leaders are freedom fighters and the celebrations are conducted by the people in recognition of their contribution to the society and therefore, they should be allowed to conduct the celebration with police protection. They also contend that various political party leaders, communal leaders and leaders of various organizations and general public would assemble there to pay homage to their respective leaders. This year only, the police is imposing restrictions not to hire vehicles to travel to the memorials/birth places and refuse to give permission for conducting meeting. Therefore, they are before this Court.

7. Heard Mr. T. Lajapathiraj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners in W.P.No.13607 of 2013 and Mr. W. Peter Rameshkumar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.Nos.14287 of 2013 and Mr. R. Murugappan, learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner in W.P.No. 14198 of 2013 and Mr. Aayiram K. Selvakumar learned Government Advocate for the respondents. Strictly speaking, W.P.No. 14287 of 2013 and W.P.No. 13607 of 2013 have become infructuous, as they sought permission for the respective functions on 20.8.2013 and 1.9.2013. In any event, considering the public interest, this court disposes of all these writ petitions together on merits.

8. It is disheartening to note that communal and castiest forces are raising their ugly heads often. This court is aware that southern part of Tamil Nadu is communally very sensitive. Any untoward incident would definitely create communal tension, law and order problem. Nowadays, year by year new leaders/heroes are discovered as caste leaders so as to enable them to conduct celebration in their names. These celebrations are terms as “gurupoojas”. It is being said that these occasions are being used by various persons of the same community to show their might to claim so as to get leadership of their community and also to exhibit their strength with a view to get supremacy of their community over and above the other communities. No doubt, the heroes and freedom fighters are required to be honoured, irrespective of their communities. However, in reality, it is said they are being honoured not fo

















































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top