Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
S.P.R. Gunasekaran - Petitioner
Versus
The Inspector of Police, Edaiyur Police Station, Edaiyur, Thiruvarur District – Respondent
W.P.No.11181 of 2025 and W.M.P.No.12603 of 2025
Decided On : 26-03-2025
(A) Writ Petition - Permission to conduct cultural programme - The petitioner sought to quash the order rejecting permission for the Aadal Padal programme during a temple festival, citing peaceful conduct over two decades - The court emphasized the need for police to consider requests for such events reasonably and within a timely manner. (Paras 1, 2, 8)
(B) Law and Order - The court noted that the police must grant permission for cultural events unless there is a substantial law and order concern, and that conditions can be imposed to ensure public safety. (Paras 6, 8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, representing villagers, sought permission for a cultural programme during a temple festival, which had been conducted peacefully for years. The police rejected the request citing potential law and order issues.
Findings of Court:
The court quashed the police's rejection of permission, directing them to grant it with conditions to ensure public order.
Issues: The main issues were the validity of the police's rejection of the event and the need for timely consideration of such requests.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that cultural events with a history of peaceful conduct should not be denied without substantial justification, and emphasized the importance of timely police responses to requests for permission.
Result: Writ Petition allowed with directions for permission and police protection.
ORDER :
(G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.)
This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner, to set aside the impugned order passed by the respondent dated 21.03.2025, thereby rejecting permission to conduct the Aadal Padal programme to be held on 07.04.2025 during the night time at 06.00 P.M to 10.00 P.M on the eve of “Edaiyur Village Arulmigu Ponnavarathamman Temple Festival at Thiruthuraipoondi Taluk, Thiruvarur District, and quash the impugned order along with the consequential prayer for granting permission and an adequate police protection to conduct the Aadal Padal programme on 07.04.2025.
2. The petitioner averred that he along with the villagers are belong to Edaiyur village and in their village, there is a temple called Arulmigu Ponnavarathamman Temple Festival at Thiruthuraipoondi Taluk, Thiruvarur District and they are celebrating festival. During the temple festival, a cultural programme like Aadal padal programme is being conducted for the past two decades in a peaceful manner without any law and order problem. Likewise, in this year also, Arulmigu Ponnavarathamman Temple Festival is scheduled for two days and there is a proposal to conduct Aadal padal programme on 07.04.2025 at about 06.00 P.M. to 10.00 P.M. Therefore, the petitioner submitted a representation to the respondent, seeking permission to conduct Aadal padal programme on 07.04.2025. The respondent, without considering the above circumstances, mechanically rejected permission to conduct Aadal padal programme for the reason that if they conduct Aadal padal programme, there will be a law and order problem. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that this Court repeatedly directs the police officials to grant permission to conduct Aadal padal programme and other related programmes with certain conditions. Therefore, he prayed to quash the impugned order and prayed to grant permission to conduct Aadal padal programme on 07.04.2025.
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents submitted that if the petitioner is allowed to conduct Aadal padal programme, there will be a law and order problem. Therefore, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials placed on record.
6. It is relevant to rely the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 10.07.2018 made in W.P.(MD)No.14491 of 2018, where, this Court has held as follows:
“3. ....... In M.Velmurugan V. The Superintendent of Police , on 24.01.2018. In passing orders in W.P.(MD) No.13440 of 2017 , dated 20.07.2017, this Court had observed as follows:-
“3.We may at the very outset note that the celebrations pertain to Arulmighu Sankaranarayana Swamy Temple, Sankarankovil. It is a very ancient and renowed Temple. It is under the control of the Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Department. It is beyond dispute that celebrations in such Temples are customary in nature. It is not as if the writ petitioner is seeking to introduce some new practice. What is being traditionally held and conducted has to be necessarily followed. Therefore, we have no hesitation in allowing the writ petition as prayed for”
It is also relevant to note the notification dated 10.08.2017 in S.O.2555(E) by the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change, wherein, it has been stated as follows:
“3.In the principal rules, in rule 5, for sub-rule (3), the following shall be substituted namely:-
(3)Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-rule(2), the State Government may subject to such terms and conditions as are necessary to reduce noise pollution, permit use of loud speakers or public address systems and the like during night hours (between 10.00 p.m. to 12.00 midnight) on or during any cultural, religious or festive occasion of a limited duration not exceeding fifteen days in all during a calendar year and the concerned State Government or District Aut
Cultural events with a history of peaceful conduct should not be denied by police without substantial justification, and timely consideration of requests is essential.
Traditional cultural celebrations should not be denied without substantial evidence of potential disruption, and timely police responses to permission requests are essential.
The court upheld the right to conduct customary cultural programmes, emphasizing timely police action and the need for substantial evidence to deny permission based on law and order concerns.
Cultural events should not be denied without substantial justification, and authorities must respond promptly to requests for permissions.
The court affirmed the right to conduct traditional cultural programmes, emphasizing timely police consideration and the necessity of maintaining public order.
The court upheld the right to conduct traditional cultural programs, emphasizing timely police consideration and the importance of maintaining public order.
Traditional cultural celebrations must be respected, and police must consider requests for such events reasonably and within a specified timeframe.
Traditional cultural events should be permitted unless substantial law and order concerns are evidenced, emphasizing timely police consideration of requests for protection.
The court affirmed the right to conduct traditional cultural events, emphasizing the need for police to grant permissions unless significant law and order concerns exist.
Customary celebrations should be upheld unless substantial evidence of potential disruption exists, emphasizing timely consideration of requests for police permission.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
