Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.In addition to the above, Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, contended that till 09.04.2015, there was no law and order problem in the area nor there was any communal disharmony. According to him, during a temple car festival, some children, who attended the temple festive, picked up quarrel between themselves, and that they were taken to the police station. Being aggrieved over the same, people belonging to some sections of the Society had an issue with the police and for not handling the situation properly, the Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, was transferred on 09.04.2015 and only because of that incident, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Aruppukottai Sub- Division, Thiruchuli Sub-Division (in-charge), Thiruchuli, has passed the impugned order, rejecting the request of the petitioner to celebrate Dr.Ambedkar's 125th Birth Anniversary, at Dr.Ambedkar Thidal, stating that there would be a law and order problem.

14.The second reason stated in the impugned order dated 12.04.2015 is that consequent to the occurrence on 02.04.2015 in a temple festival, there was a clash between two groups of people and that there was a law and order problem. Though the second respondent has stated that criminal cases have been registered and thus there was a law and order problem, during the course of argument, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that only one criminal case in Crime No.82 of 2005 on the file of Thiruchuli Police Station under Sections 147, 148, 452, 294(b), 324, 307 and 506(ii) IPC, has been registered and not many cases, as mentioned in the impugned order, dated 12.04.2015. As per the impugned order, dated 12.04.2015, between 04.04.2015 and 18.04.2015, an order under Section 30(2) of the Police Act, is in force. At this juncture, we deem it fit to extract Section 30 of the Police Act, which reads as under:

Provided that no fee shall be charged on the application for, or grant of any such licence. "

15.On the contention of Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that till 08.04.2015, there was no law and order problem in the area and only when the Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, did not deal with the situation, properly, there was a problem, which resulted in the transfer of Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli and consequently, Police in large numbers have bee posted, we enquired Mr.T.Madasamy, Additional Superintendent of Police, present in the Court. He submitted that in the temple festival, there was some problem between the children and they were brought to the police station and thereafter only trouble started. From the statement of the Additional Superintendent of Police, it is clear that between different sections of the people, there was no communal disharmony or any incident inciting any problem in the temple festival, but, it was due to some incident between children. From the statement of Additional Superintendent of Police, it appears that if the elders belonging to different sections of the communities had no issues in the conduct of the festival. Had the incident between the children been handled properly, there would not have been any problem. The Additional Superintendent of Police, present in the court, also admitted that the incident between the children was not dealt with properly and therefore the Inspector of Police, Thiruchuli Police Station, was transferred on 09.04.2015.

20.From the statement of the Additional Superintendent of Police, present in the court, it appears to be a fight or quarrel between children, who had attended the temple car festival and the improper handling of the same would have probably given rise to a situation of law and order problem. Though adequate Police is stated to have been posted near the temple to avoid any untoward incident, still, they have all the powers under the police Act, to maintain law and order.

21.Organizers have intended to distribute sweets, savories, pongal and Annadhanam and to grant some welfare assistance, nothing more is scheduled on 14.04.2015. From the letter, dated 10.04.2015, of Ilavarasan, Secretary of Petitioner Mandram, Thiruchuli, it could be seen that the petitioner Mandram has intended to invite the Tahsildar, Thiruchuli, to inaugurate the celebrations. As rightly contended by Mr.R.Singaravelan, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, if really there was any law and order problem, no Government official would have consented to attend the function, more particularly, an Executive Magistrate, who is also duty bound to maintain peace and order. Answering to the above, the learned Additional Advocate General, submitted that no proof is produced before the Court evidencing that the Tahsidlar, Thiruchuli, has agreed to attend the function. Whoever be the person attending the Programme, fact remains that the programme is for celebrating one of the National Leaders of our country. Needless to state that even the government have declared Dr.Ambedkar's Birthday as public holiday. Many institutions and governments are celebrating his birthday. Considering the freedom of a citizen under Article 19(1)(a)&(b) of the Constitution of India vis-a-vis the police powers under Section 30(2) of the Police Act, this Court is of the view that it is for the Police to maintain law and order, in any area, where birthday celebrations are conducted for national leaders. There cannot be a total prohibition. It is the selfless national leaders, who got freedom for us, and freedom of speech and expression is a constitutional right. Celebrating their birth or death anniversaries, should not be curtailed , but, at the same time, law and order to be maintained. Restriction of the constitutional rights under Article 19(1)(a)&(b), should satisfy the test of reasonableness, with concrete materials.