High Court · 2025

W.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED: 19.03.2025CORAM :THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABALW.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025K.K.Ondimuthu ... PetitionerVs1. The Commissioner of Police,Thiruchirapalli City,Trichy.2. The Inspector of Police,K.K.Nagar Police Station,Thiruchirapalli City. ... RespondentsPRAYER: 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 in respect of the impugned order passed by the 2nd respondent dated 12.03.2025 in his proceedings in reference Na.Ka.No. 22/KAA.AA.A/K.K.Na/Thi.Ma/2025 and quash the same as illegal and in consequence, directing the respondents to accord permission to the petitioner for the meeting to be held at military grounds, Mannar Puram, Trichy on 23.03.2025 from 5 PM onwards up to 8.30 PM and provide proper security arrangements.1/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025For Petitioner : Mr.Anandhapadmanabhan Senior Counsel for M/s.Apn Law Associates.For Respondents : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public ProsecutorO R D E RThis Writ Petition has been filed seeking to quash the impugned order passed by the second respondent dated 12.03.2025 in his proceedings in reference Na.Ka.No. 22/KAA.AA.A/K.K.Na/Thi.Ma/2025 and to direct the respondents to accord permission to the petitioner for the meeting to be held at military grounds, Mannar Puram, Trichy on 23.03.2025 from 5 PM onwards up to 8.30 PM and provide proper security arrangements.2.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is the District President of Bharatiya Janata Party, Trichy and they decided to conduct a programme by explaining the purpose of the New Educational Policy of the Central Government. 2/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025Therefore, they fixed the meeting on 23.03.2025 and chosen the particular date as it is a public holiday and there will not be any traffic disturbance for the people. In fact it is not a political meeting and the Central Minister has also consented to attend the meeting and explain about the New Educational Policy of the Central Government. Therefore, the petitioner furnished an application fifteen days prior to the date of the meeting to the Commissioner of Police and the meeting is to be conducted in the place belongs to the Indian Armed Forces at Mannar Puram, Trichy. The said place is a well secured place and there is no objection from the Department of Defence and they also accorded permission to conduct the meeting. While so, the second respondent passed the impugned order by declining to grant permission by citing that the above said place is very near to Chennai - Madurai National Highway and all the buses from the Central Bus stand to Madurai and Dindigul District would proceed via Mannar Puram and within 450 meters, a flyover works are also going on. and some offices and colleges are situated in an around the place. More than 40,000 persons through 2,000 vehicles would participate in the meeting. Therefore, it will cause disturbance to the public. In fact, the second respondent is not a competent person to pass such order and without hearing the petitioner, 3/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025the said order was passed. The petitioner already got permission from the defence authorities to conduct the meeting and the petitioner also assured that they will not cause any traffic congestion to the public and they will not park the vehicles in the Highway. Therefore, the order passed by the second respondent has to be set aside and permission has to be granted to the petitioner for conducting the meeting. 3.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent police would submit that the petitioner's representation was rejected through an elaborate order. If the petitioner suggests some other alternative place, the respondents have objection to grant permission. The place earmarked by the petitioner is located in the heart of the city and it is very nearer to the central bus stand and railway junction and it is an entrance for the vehicles from Dindigul, Madurai and Tirunelveli District. If permission is granted, it will certainly cause disturbance to the public. Therefore, the second respondent passed the reasonable order. Hence this petition is liable to be dismissed.4.Heard both sides and perused the records.4/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.7404 of 20255.According to the petitioner, they want to conduct meeting in respect of explaining the purpose of the New Educational Policy of the Central Government at military grounds, Mannar Puram, Trichy and they already obtained permission from the Department of Defence for conducting the meeting and the learned Senior Counsel also assured that the participants will not create traffic congestion by parking the vehicles in the Highway and there is sufficient place available for conducting meeting in the said ground. The petitioner has not stated about the participants in the meeting. While so, the respondent police observed that more than 40,000 people would gather in the meeting and more than 2000 vehicles would be parked in the very congested area. Therefore, permission was declined. Since the meeting was fixed on 23.03.2025, within a short span of time, there is no possibility for organizing the meeting in an alternative place and the proposed ground also belongs to the Department of Defense and they also accorded permission for conducting the meeting. Therefore, there will not be any traffic congestion as expected by the respondent police.6.This Court also considered the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the assurance given by the petitioner 5/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025that without any traffic congestion and without parking the vehicles in the Highway, they will conduct the meeting. Therefore, considering all other factors, this Court is inclined to allow this petition. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the second respondent is set aside. Therefore, this writ petition is allowed with a direction to the respondent police to provide adequate police protection and also ensure the safety of the public and take necessary action to clear the traffic congestion. If any deviations, the respondent police are at liberty to take appropriate action in accordance with law. 19.03.2025Internet:YesIndex :Yes/NoNCC:Yes/NoLRNote:Issue Order copy on 19.03.2025To1. The Commissioner of Police,Thiruchirapalli City,Trichy.2. The Inspector of Police,K.K.Nagar Police Station,Thiruchirapalli City.3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.6/7 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P(MD)No.7404 of 2025P.DHANABAL , J. LRW.P(MD)No.7404 of 202519.03.20257/7