Madras High Court
Muniyandi vs The Superintendent Of Police on 22 May, 2024
Author: S.Srimathy
Bench: S.Srimathy
W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.05.2024
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SRIMATHY
W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024
Muniyandi ... Petitioner
Vs
1.The Superintendent of Police,
Viruthunagar District,
Viruthunagar.
2.The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Mamsapuram Police Station,
Viruthunagar District. ... Respondents
PRAYER: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of
India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, to call
for the records pertaining to the impugned order passed by the 2nd
respondent, dated 09.05.2024 and quash the same and consequently
directing the 2nd respondent to give permission to the petitioner to organize
dance program (Nadana Nadiya Kalai Nigalchi) on 23.05.2024 from 06.00
pm to 11.00pm at Arulmigu Sri Samayapuram Mariyamman Temple with
light and sound.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.Jeyaram Sidharth
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar
Government Advocate(Crl.Side)
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed challenging the impugned order, dated 09.05.2024 passed by the second respondent rejecting the petitioner's request for grant of permission to conduct dance program (Nadana Nadiya Kalai Nigalchi) on 23.05.2024 from 06.00 pm at Arulmigu Sri Samayapuram Mariyamman Temple and to give permission to conduct the programme.
2. In similar matters, where permission was sought for to conduct Adal Padal programmes, the Hon'ble Division Bench of this Court in W.P. (MD).No.12535 of 2023 in the case of C.Sathasivam Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy and another, had an occasion to consider the issue and in the said decision dated 24.05.2023, the Division Bench had issued the following directions to the respondents therein:
“15. Therefore, this Court, in order to give a quietus to such issues, disposes of this writ petition with the following directions:
(a) On the seventh day from the date of the receipt of the representation, for the conduct of the cultural program (Adal 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024 Padal), associated with any temple festival, if the authorities do not take steps either to grant permission or reject permission, there shall be a deemed permission on the eighth day;
(b)On such deemed permission, the organisers, who shall be the responsible members of the festival committee, shall ensure that only cultural programs having some relevance to the temple or the festival in question would be conducted and there shall not be any obscene display/dance being conducted;
(c) The program shall not extend beyond 10 p.m.;
(d)No women participating in the cultural program would be depicted or portrayed in an obscene or undignified manner either in the form of clothing or otherwise;
(e) The music that shall be used shall be in sync with the precincts of the temple and double meaning songs should not be played;
(f) There shall be no supply of alcohol or any intoxicating material in and around the area where cultural program is scheduled to be held;
In case of violation of any conditions, it is open to the authorities to initiate such action as is required under law and the persons who are the organisers/committee members shall be held responsible. The Public Prosecutors shall ensure circulation of this order to the Superintendent of Police of all the Districts for issuing suitable instructions to their subordinate officers. No costs.” 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024
3. In the instant case, the petitioner has given a representation to the respondents seeking permission to conduct dance programme. Necessarily, the respondents will have to abide by the directions of the Division Bench of this Court in the aforesaid decision. However, as seen from the impugned order, the directions issued by the Division Bench have not been considered by the second respondent while rejecting the petitioner's representation. In view of the same, the impugned order has to be quashed and the representation of the petitioner will have to be considered by the first respondent afresh on merits and in accordance with law after giving due consideration to the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P.(MD).No.12535 of 2023 dated 24.05.2023 in the case of C.Sathasivam Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy and another.
4. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 09.05.2024 passed by the second respondent is hereby quashed and the first respondent is directed to pass final orders on merits and in accordance with law on the petitioner's representation in the light of the directions issued by the Division Bench of this Court on 24.05.2023 in W.P.(MD).No.12535 of 2023 in the case of 4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024 C.Sathasivam Vs. The Superintendent of Police, Trichy and another, on or before 23.05.2024.
5. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs.
22.05.2024 NCC : Yes/No Internet:Yes/No Index:Yes/No GBG Note: Issue order copy on 22.05.2024.
5/7https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024 To
1.The Superintendent of Police, Viruthunagar District, Viruthunagar.
2.The Sub-Inspector of Police, Mamsapuram Police Station, Viruthunagar District.
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.
6/7https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024 S.SRIMATHY, J.
GBG ORDER IN W.P.(MD).No.11289 of 2024 22.05.2024 7/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis