The court upheld the right to conduct traditional cock fights with police protection, contingent upon compliance with safety and welfare conditions.

ORDER :

This Writ Petition has been filed calling for records related to the impugned order passed by the third respondent in letter dated 18.03.2025 and quash the same and consequently directing the respondents to grant permission and police protection for conducting cock fight programme on 12th, 13th, 14th days of April 2025 in Peramabkkam village, situated in Kadambathur block, Thiruvallur Taluk, Thiruvallur district.

2. Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials available on record.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, the petitioner along with a group of persons constituted a committee in their village, and has been conducting cock fight for the past several years in a grand and peaceful manner without any gambling. The said 'cock fight' is one of the ancient festival game being organised or conducted in temple festivals and other festivals in the country side.

4. In the yester years, when such function was organised by the petitioner and his group, the respondent police did not give permission or protection and therefore, the petitioner had to approach this court by filing writ petitions and orders were obtained. In this regard, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the orders passed in earlier years i.e., 2014, 2015 as well as in the year 2017. In those years, pursuant to the directions issued by this court, in the respective writ petitions filed by the petitioner, permission as well as protection was given by the respondent police for smoothly conducting the 'cock fight' on the eve of the Thaipoosam celebrations.

5. On the eve of the said celebrations, the petitioner and his group has organised the 'cock fight' this year also and for the said purpose in order to get permission and police protection, the petitioner had already given a representation dated 01.03.2025 to the respondents to conduct cock fight on 12.04.2025 to 14.04.2025. However, so far, they have not considered the said request and no permission has been so far given by the respondents. Therefore, this year also, the petitioner was constrained to approach this court, by filing this writ petition seeking appropriate direction to the respondents police.

6. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the respondents, who would submit that, in the name of 'cock fight' since no untoward incidents be allowed to happen in the locality, the respondents police are more cautious in granting permission and therefore, if the conditions imposed by this Court in the earlier orders for granting permission for conducting 'cock fight' are imposed along with some additional conditions to ensure the smooth conducting of such function, the respondents would consider the said request of the petitioner for grant of permission or police bandobust.

7. As has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner, in the year 2013 itself in W.P.No.635 of 2013, a learned Judge of this Court by order dated 08.01.2017, passed the following order :

“In the light of the above said earlier Division bench orders, this writ petition stands disposed of with a direction to the respondents to give permission to conduct the cock fight by the petitioner on 17.01.2013 and 18.01.2013 with the supervision of the second respondent as well as any one of the veterinary doctor from Valakkanampoondi Puthu Village, R.K.Pettai Post, Tiruttani Taluk, Tiruvallur District for the purpose of diagnosis of the birds. The petitioner is directed to bear the expenses for providing police supervision and the veterinary doctor attending the supervision.”

8. Like that, similar orders were passed in the year 2014 also in W.P.No.47 of