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

2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 27388

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
M.Nirmal Kumar, J
A.J.S Recreation and Sports Welfare Association – Appellant
Versus
The Superintendent of Police, Dindigul District – Respondent
W.P.(MD)No. 717 of 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr.D.Venkatesh
For the Respondents: Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar Additional Public Prosecutor

Associations must obtain licenses as per the Tamil Nadu Places of Public Resort Act, 1888, to avoid police interference.

Headnote:The petitioner, a registered association under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, seeks protection from police interference in lawful activities. The court held that the association must obtain licensing as required under the Tamil Nadu Places of Public Resort Act, 1888. The issues framed include the legality of police interference and licensing requirements. The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with local regulations, and the petitioner was directed to apply for the necessary licenses. The Writ Petition stands disposed of with the above directions.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks protection against police interference. (Para 1 , 2)
2. petitioner argues entitlement to conduct activities without interference. (Para 3 , 4)
3. court emphasizes licensing requirements under specified acts. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
4. direction to comply with licensing requirements ordered. (Para 8)
5. writ petition disposed with directives. (Para 9)

ORDER

This Writ Petition has been filed seeking a direction forbearing the respondents in any way interfering with the functioning of the petitioner association in accordance with the by-laws of the association

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that, the club was registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. The petitioner is running the Club to promote various facilities to their members and it is not involving in any illegal activity. According to the petitioner, the respondent Police are interfering and disturbing the lawful activities of the Club, without following any provisions of law and preventing them from doing their activities peacefully. Hence, the present Writ Petition has been filed.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would contend that the Club was registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975, and the Club is being run for the benefit of its'

members. The petitioner's Club was entitled to conduct lawful activities in its premises and also could conduct entertainment programmes. The respondent Police have no power to deny the petitioner's Clubs to conduct lawful activities.

4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents would submit that the petitioner's club was registered under the Tamil Nadu Societies Registration Act, 1975. They are conducting various programmes to entertain their members. Based on some reliable information, the respondent Police made a search in the respective Clubs. Apart from that, the petitioner has not obtained licence as per Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Places of Public Resort Act , 1888. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor relied upon the order passed by this Court in W.P.(MD).Nos.5560 of 2018, etc., batch cases-[ Mass Recreation Club-Shengottah represented by its Secretary Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Tirunelveli District, Tirunelveli and others], dated 13.07.2018, wherein, this Court held that the petitioner should necessarily get license from the Authority concerned under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Places of Public Resort Act , 1888. The above order has been confirmed by a Division Bench of this Court in W.A.(MD).No.1017 of 2018, dated 31.07.2018. The relevant portion of the judgment reads as follows:-

“3.We have recorded the reason for dismissal of the Writ Petition. We find absolutely no reason to differ. Informing that appellant has to obtaining necessary permission under Tamil Nadu Places of Public Resort Act , 1888 and on doing so, it would be open for the appellant Club to indulge in Rummy Card games and other recreation activities, other than those that what offend the Tamil Nadu Gambling Act, this Writ Appeal stands dismissed.”

5. That apart, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondents has relied upon Section 34 of the Chennai City Police Act, 1888. Section 34 of the above said Act reads as follows:-

“34.Places of public resort to be licensed-(1)No enclosed place or building having an area of five hundred square feet or upwards shall be used for public entertainment or resort without a licence from the Commissioner.

Provided that nothing contained in this Sub-Section shall apply to any Church, Temple, Mosque, or other place of worship.

(2)The Commissioner may, at the time of grant of a licence under Sub-Section (1) or at any time during the currency of any such licence, require any person, other than a local authority, applying for such licence or the holder of such licence, as the case may be, to deposit with the Commissioner in cash or in Government promissory notes for such

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