ORDER:

The Writ petition is moved by way of house motion, by the petitioner.

2. This Writ Petition is filed assailing the proceedings No.L&O/LO2/0125/2023 dated 17.02.2023 issued by the 3rd respondent whereby the application of the petitioner for grant of permission to take out (cid:147)Bharat Matha Rally(cid:148) on the occasion of the Birthday celebration of the Glorious Chatrapathi Shivaji Maharaj on 19.02.2023 has been rejected by the 3rd respondent. 3. Heard Sri M. Govind Reddy, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Sri Abdul Mateen Qureshi, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home appearing for the respondents and with their consent the writ petition is taken for hearing and disposal at admission stage.

4. Petitioner contends that the 3rd respondent had mechanically rejected the application made by it for grant of permission and none of the two reasons stated thereat can be taken as a valid ground for rejection of the same.

5. Petitioner further submits that the rally is being organized between 8:30 am to 1:00 p.m on a Sunday the area through which rallies proposed to be undertaken would not throw public life out of gear or cause any inconvenience much less enormous inconvenience to road users or employees as stated by the 3rd respondent in the impugned proceeding.

6. Petitioner further contends that the rally being carried out is that of the (cid:147)Bharat Matha(cid:148) a national personification of India as a mother goddess and that the territory of India is known as (cid:147)Bharat(cid:148) as per Article 1 of the Constitution of India. The claim of the 3rd respondent that by taking out a rally of mother goddess of the country is likely to cause disturbance to public peace, law and order is totally unfounded inasmuch as what is being depicted is or is sought to promote is only belongings to the country and every citizen who stands by the country cannot and would not have any grievance and on the other hand would only increase patriotism among the citizens.

7. Petitioner further contends that the rejection of its application by the 3rd respondent on the ground that it may cause disturbance and lead to law and order issue is without any basis and as such the rejection of the application for grant of permission is in violation of Article 19(1) and 25 of Constitution of India and contrary to law laid down by the Supreme Court in Ram Manohar Lohia v. State of Bihar1.

8. Per Contra, Learned Assistant Government Pleader for Home submits that the route through which the petitioner intends to take out rally would fall within the jurisdiction of five police stations (L&O), of which atleast two areas are sensitive areas, the passage of rally through such areas could pose law and order issue and thus the 3rd respondent taking the inputs received from the concerned authorities into consideration, had rejected the application of the petitioner.

9. Ld. Assistant Government Pleader for Home would further submit that, since it is primary duty of the respondent police to maintain law and order, the decision taken by the 3rd respondent may not be interfered with.

10. Alternatively, the Ld. Assistant Government Pleader for Home would submit that, if this court were to direct the respondents to accord permission, as the distance of the rally is less than 10 kms, falling under five different police stations limits, the time may be reduced to about 2‰ hours to 3 hours as against 8.30 AM to 1.00 PM, to cover the said distance from

1 AIR 1966 SC 740

the starting point to the ending point as indicated by the petitioner/ applicant in the application made to the respondent. 11. Learned Assistant Government Pleader would further submit that if this Court were to consider granting of permission, the Court may also put a restriction on number of participants participating in the rally so as not to cause inconvenience to the regular traffic in the area and the organizers may also be directed to cooperate with law enforcing agency for smooth movement a