BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 11/02/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY M.Prabhakaran ... Petitioner Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Virudhunagar District.

Virudhunagar..

2. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Aviyur Police Station, Virudhunagar District. ... Respondents PRAYER :- Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for issuance of Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents to grant permission and provide necessary police protection for conducting the traditional Kida Muttu event on 28^th February 2026 at Aaviyur Village, Kariapatti Block, Virudhunagar District.

For Petitioner : Mr.Aravind.C, Advocate.

For Respondent : Mr.A.S. Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This petition has been filed seeking to direct the respondent to grant permission and provide necessary police protection for conducting the traditional Kida Muttu event on 28^th February 2026 at Aaviyur Village, Kariapatti Block, Virudhunagar District.

2. When the matter was taken up for hearing, the learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for the respondents submitted that the Commissioner of Animal Husbandry and Veterinary Services, by proceedings dated 06.01.2022, had clarified that only Jallikattu, Manjuvirattu, Erudu Vidum Vizha and Vadamadu events are permitted, and that Rekhla race, cockfighting, etc., are not permissible. In the present case, the petitioner is seeking permission to conduct a Kidamuttu programme, which does not fall under Jallikattu or the permitted events.

3. This Court has already considered the very same issue in W.P.(Crl)(MD) No.2575 of 2025, by order dated 05.01.2026, wherein the matter was dealt with in detail.

''4.The contention of the petitioner is that ‘Cock-

Flight’ is one of the customary festivals in Tamil Nadu and the same is conducted during the ‘Thai Pongal’ festival. Since it is a customary practice, the petitioner seeks to continue the same.

5. Per contra, the respondents vehemently objected, stating that the Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court declined permission vide order dated 21.05.2014 in W.P. (MD) No.8040 of 2014. Following the same, a learned Single Judge of this Court also declined permission vide order dated 09.10.2025 in W.P.(MD) No.27950 of 2025. However, another Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, vide order dated 29.04.2025 in W.P.(MD) No. 13048 of 2025, permitted the conduct of ‘Kidaa-Muttu’. Since ‘Cock-Flight’ is stated to be similar in nature, the petitioner seeks similar permission.

6. Further, another learned Single Judge of the Principal Bench at Madras, vide order dated 15.04.2025 in W.P. No.13309 of 2025, had permitted the conduct of ‘Cock-Flight’

7. Since there are inconsistent orders, the respondent police submitted that permission cannot be granted. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the Hon’ble Principal Bench passed an order dated 13.08.2025 in W.P. Nos.25985, 25986 and 25987 of 2025 in the case of Gauri Maulekhi Vs. The Additional Chief Secretary, Home and five other, wherein the earlier order dated 21.05.2014 passed in W.P.(MD) No.8040 of 2014 was referred to, and appropriate directions were issued. The relevant paragraph Nos.3 to 5 are extracted hereunder: ......

“ 3.The issue raised is with regard to the alleged cruelty on birds during the cock fight. Number of orders have been brought to the notice of this Court by learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners, including the decision in the case of S.Kannan V. The Commissioner of Police, Madurai City, Madurai and others, reported in 2014(3) CTC 676. 4. Learned State counsel prays for and is granted three weeks' time to file reply. 5. Taking into consideration the earlier orders passed by this Court and the provisions contained in the Tamil Nadu Gaming Act, 1930 and the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, it is directed that, in any event involving cocks, the provisions of the aforesaid Acts shall be scru