✦ Madras High Court

Judgment · High Court

2 min read

Case at a glance

Provisions considered

Key paragraphs

  • Para 55. For the reasons stated supra, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.12-02-2026Tmg https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.805 of 2026To1. The Superintendent of PoliceKanniyakumari District. 2. The Deputy Superintendent of PoliceMarthandamKanyakumari District.3. The Inspector of PoliceKollencode Police StationKanyakumari District

Judgment

W.P.Crl. (MD)No.805 of 2026BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED: 12-02-2026CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MRS JUSTICE S.SRIMATHYWP Crl. (MD) NO. 805 of 2026G.SasiPetitioner(s) Vs1. The Superintendent of PoliceKanniyakumari District.

2.

The Deputy Superintendent of PoliceMarthandamKanyakumari District.

3.

The Inspector of PoliceKollencode Police StationKanyakumari DistrictRespondent(s) For Petitioner(s): Mr.A.BalakrishnanFor Respondent(s): Mr.A.S.Abul Kalaam Azad, Government Advocate (Crl.side)Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 3rd respondent to grant permission to undergo continuous hunger strike in front of the Kollencode Municipality from 16.02.2026 onwards by considering the representation dated 09.01.2026. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.805 of 2026ORDERThe present Writ Petition has been filed for the issuance of a Writ of Mandamus, to direct the 3rd respondent to grant permission to undergo continuous hunger strike in front of the Kollencode Municipality from 16.02.2026 onwards by considering the representation dated 09.01.2026.2. The petitioner is claiming that he is doing social activity in the locality for the welfare of the general public. Further stated that major part of the residential and commercial area under the respondent municipality was not maintained by the authority in a clean manner. The dustbin was not provided, resulting in dumping of garbage indiscriminately in various places. The waste accumulated from the hotels, marriage halls and other wastes namely meat, fish waste are being dumped in municipal areas. Such waste creates risk of transmission of disease, further it is emitting foul odors thereby causing air pollution. Since the respondent municipality has not maintained the municipal area clean, the petitioner had filed a writ petition in W.P.Crl. (MD)2670 of 2025 inter alia praying to grant permission for conducting hunger strike. This Court vide order dated 18.12.2025 directed the respondents to grant permission to conduct hunger strike on 20.12.2025 from 10.00 am to 5 pm with other conditions. The respondents had granted permission and the petitioner had https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.805 of 2026completed the hunger strike. 3. Now, in the present petition, the petitioner is seeking to grant permission to do “continuous hunger strike” and demanding the respondent municipality to clean the municipal area.

4.

There is no doubt that maintaining the municipal area clean is one of the duties of the municipality. At the same the people who are residing in the municipal area are also duty bound to keep the area clean. By doing “continuous hunger strike” against the respondent municipality the municipal area cannot be maintained clean. There should be contribution from the people residing in the municipal area. The people ought to be taught civic sense. Therefore, this Court is of the considered opinion that by doing “continuous hunger strike”, the municipal area cannot be maintained clean, unless the people are taught civic responsibility / Swachh Bharat.

5.

For the reasons stated supra, this Writ Petition is dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.12-02-2026Tmg https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl. (MD)No.805 of 2026To1. The Superintendent of PoliceKanniyakumari District. 2. The Deputy Superintendent of PoliceMarthandamKanyakumari District.3. The Inspector of PoliceKollencode Police StationKanyakumari District

Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case

No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.

This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.

Why is this linked?

This is the original judgment text, reproduced from the public court record. Always verify it against the official record before relying on it in a filing — check it on Madras High Court or eCourts case status. ← Search more judgments