The Madras High Court has ordered the police to allow route marches in all 58 locations across the state, stating that the police should not be forced to seek the court’s intervention every year. This should be the last time, and in the future, permission should be granted after holding discussions with them.
Clear instructions not to meddle with the RSS rally in future by the honourable High court! pic.twitter.com/z0zRXNuSsG
— karthik gopinath (@karthikgnath) October 1, 2024
Tirupur RSS Mandal Secretary M. Jothiprakash and K. Sethuraj, Joint Secretary of RSS in Dindigul, have filed petitions in the Madras High Court seeking a direction to the police. They appealed to the court to direct the police to allow them to hold their annual route marches on October 6 to celebrate Vijayadasami at 58 locations across the state. The petition came before Justice G. Jayachandran. The petitioners’ counsel argued that their request is in line with a High Court direction from January, which provided guidelines for conducting such rallies. Ignoring these guidelines and submitting applications for permission, the petitioners stated that the police have not acted on them. They emphasized that permission is needed a week ahead of the route marches
The judge, after hearing both sides, posted the matter for further hearing on the 24th and granted time to consider the applications submitted by the petitioners. When the matter came up for hearing on the 26th, the judge, in his order, said: ‘The learned senior counsels appearing for some of the writ petitioners reported today that, late last night, the representations were rejected on flimsy grounds, merely to deny the request and circumvent the earlier orders of this court and the Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in this matter.’
The judge stated that the Government Advocate (Crl. Side) submitted that some of the basic particulars, such as the starting and ending points of the route march, the number of participants, and the space for parking vehicles were not provided in the representation, which was the reason for rejecting it.
Justice Jayachandran said, ‘This Court finds that for the reasons mentioned, the representations ought not to have been rejected. As already observed by this Court in the earlier judgment dated 22.09.2022, the station officer or higher officials could have called the organizer to provide the necessary details and completed the process of granting permission without rejecting it outright. In any event, the learned senior counsels appearing for the petitioners state that wherever a rejection order was issued, they have already provided the information sought by the police.’
The court has directed that the representatives of the petitioners shall meet the concerned police officers on 27.09.2024 and provide the particulars required by the respondent police. The details about the route march shall be finalized by following the guidelines framed by this Court in the order dated 05.01.2023 and shall report to this Court on 30.09.2024 at 02:15 PM, with the same being posted for the afternoon of September 30th.”
When the matter came up yesterday before the judge, the state government said they had given permission for 42 locations, while permission for the remaining locations was denied. The reasons they stated evoked laughter in the courtroom, as they claimed that a rally would create problems for the college and school students. It was pointed out that October 2 was a Holiday and that even on weekdays, it would be a public holiday. The court said, ‘It is at a loss to understand why the TN police deny permission for some select places, whereas all over India it has been conducted peacefully, and the state grants permission in all places, even at taluk levels. By tomorrow, the remaining places should be considered and permission given.’
On October 1st (today), the matter came up for hearing before Justice G. Jayachandran. The state government said they had considered 10 places for permission, and 6 could not be granted. When the court sought details, the state government provided the reasons for refusing permission. The court, addressing their doubts case by case, asked them to permit all 58 places, as the RSS sought permission for its annual route march.”
On October 1st (today), the matter came up for hearing before Justice G. Jayachandran. The state government said they had considered 10 places for permission, and 6 could not be granted. When the court sought details, the state government provided reasons for refusing permission. The court addressed their doubts case by case and asked them to permit all 58 places, as the RSS sought permission for its annual route march.
The court said, ‘Do not test the patience of this court. Your action is in total violation of the SC and HC orders. The HC had ordered the creation of guidelines that are in place. Why deny permission now on flimsy grounds? Kottaipattinam DSP said that since Muslims are planning to launch welfare schemes on that date, permission can’t be given for the RSS rally. In which outfit was he a member? Has the outfit submitted a petition seeking permission? Every year, they should not have to knock on the doors of the courts. It is an annual event. While the rest of the states allow the rally, why does the TN government take a different stand in opposing it? The SC and HC have previously stated that just because churches and mosques are located on the rally route, permission should not be denied on those grounds. This is a secular and democratic country. The police could grant permission and maintain law and order for Sunday’s DMK Diamond Jubilee celebrations across the state; why can’t they permit the RSS rally after addressing law and order issues? The conduct of the police proves they follow the diktats of their masters, not the Constitution.’
#RSS #Tamilnadu #highcourt #ChennaiHighCourt pic.twitter.com/VVfdem993n
— Mediyaan (@mediyaannews) October 1, 2024
Counsel for one of the petitioners, G. Karthikeyan, told Organiser that the police should follow the guidelines established after consultations with the RSS earlier. They should not be forced to go to court every year. It is not an issue for others in the state; only the RSS is treated differently.”
