The decision on police protection is the responsibility of the competent authority based on the ground situation and representations made by the petitioner.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents herein to give more adequate police protection to the public meeting and to distribute the welfare benefits to the poor people, based on the representation, dated 11/03/2023 by the AIADMK Party in order to celebrate the 75th Birthday of Hon''ble Amma Dr.J.Jayalalitha (Former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu) and in which, AIADMK Party Interim General Secretary and also Tamil Nadu Legislative Assembly Opposition Leader Hon''ble Mr.Edappadi K.Palanisamy (Former Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu) is presiding over the function, based on the representation given to the respondents, dated 11/03/2023 and pass such further or other orders)

1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking additional police protection for the meeting scheduled to be held today at 5.00 pm.

2. Heard both sides.

3. WP(MD)No.5039 of 2023 and another WP(MD)No.5143 of 2023 were heard together, on 09/03/2023 and direction was issued to the competent authority to dispose the representation made by both parties before 06.00 pm, on that date. To inform the development, the matters were listed yesterday (10/03/2023). The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that insofar as WP(MD)No.5039 of 2023 is concerned, permission was granted by the competent authority.

4. So far the other writ petition viz., W.P(MD)No.5143 of 2023 is concerned, citing some reasons, the permission was rejected. On that account, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the petitioner in the above said petition was heard and the competent authority was directed to give permission by imposing restrictions with regard to the time, venue, etc. Even at that time, the learned Senior counsel appearing for the above said parties, gave an undertaking before this court that they will not make any trouble and create any law and problem. On that account, the above said petitioner was directed to file an undertaking before the competent authority. On considering the above said undertaking, the competent authority was directed to consider the same and granted permission, the matter was disposed of.

5. Now stating that some trouble has been created by some of the persons by tearing the flex board of the Leader of the political party, trouble has been created. On that account, they wanted additional police protection for the meeting scheduled to be held at 05.00 pm today (11.03.2023).

6. On that account, the Additional Public Prosecutor was required to get instructions with regard to the ground situation. He would submit that under the head of ADSP, sufficient police force have been deployed in the meeting place. Over the tearing occurrence, no complaint was given by any person. Now the situation is under control.

7. Whether, there is adequate police protection or not, it is not for the court to decide, it is for the competent authority to assess the ground situation, depending upon the same, in this connection, a representation has been made by the petitioner before the concerned respondent, the same may be considered by the competent authority depending upon the ground situation. If required, additional force may be deployed. So, no further order is required to be passed by this court. It is also made clear that moving the court, at the 11th hour should be avoided in future.

8. With the above directions, this writ petition is disposed of. No costs.