Kalidass vs Deputy Superintendent of Police - 2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41773

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 41773

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R. Vijayakumar, J
Kalidass – Appellant
Versus
Deputy Superintendent of Police – Respondent
Writ Petition

Important Points

State authorities cannot reject applications for cultural/religious programs based solely on speculative or presumptive grounds of law and order issues without evidence of an actual threat.

Subject

Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction

Act Referred

Constitution of India: Art.226

Headnote

The present petition is filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging an order rejecting the request for conducting a temple festival cultural program. The court noted that the local authorities denied permission based on a mere presumption of potential law and order issues without concrete evidence. The issue before the court was whether the categorical denial based on presumptive law and order concerns was sustainable. The court found that law and order concerns must be based on substantial facts rather than mere apprehensions, and that arbitrary denial in such matters infringes upon the right to conduct customary celebrations. The writ petition is allowed with directions to permit the function subject to time constraints and the prohibition of obscene performances.

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P. Ponraj
For the Respondents: Abdul Kalam Azad

Table of Content
1. administrative rejection of cultural events requires concrete evidence of public threat, not mere presumption. (Para 1 , 2)

ORDER

The present writ petition has been filed to quash the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 13.05.2026 wherein the request of the petitioner for conducting adal padal function has been rejected on the ground that there is likelihood of law and order problem.

2.A perusal of the impugned order clearly reveals that the impugned order has been passed based upon presumption that law and order problem is likely to arise when the function conducted. Therefore, the impugned order is set aside. The second respondent is directed to grant permission and police protection for the abovesaid function. It is made clear that the function shall be completed before 10.00 pm. on the abovesaid dates. If any obscene dances are performed, the police authorities are entitled to interfere and proceed in accordance with law.

3.With the aforesaid directions, this writ petition is allowed. No costs.