High Court · 2025

W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURTDATED : 20.11.2025CORAMTHE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SUNDER MOHANW.P.Crl.(MD).No.1540 of 2025Karthikeyan ... Petitioner Vs.1.The Director General of Police, Chennai.2.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.3.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai.4.Tamil Nadu Traditional Sports, Rackla Races, Bulls, Untited Welfare Association, Rep. by its Secretary, M.Maran, S/o.Not known by the petitioner, 42a, Poyavayal, Nilaiyur Village, Aranthangi Taluk, Sivagangai District.5.Tamil Nadu Bull Breeder's Welfare Association, Rep. by its District Secretary, Mr.Thamba, S/o.Not known by the petitioner, Kothaiyammal Saw Mill, Sakkottai, Puduvayal Post, Sivagangai District.6.S.Mohan Sami Kumar S/o.Subramaniyam, The President of the 1/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025 Tamilnadu Bull Breeders Welfare Association, 15/5, Sadayappapillai Streeet, Avaniyapuram, Madurai - 2. (R6 is suo-motu impleaded by this Court vide order dated 09.10.2025) ... RespondentsPrayer : Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus, directing the respondents 1 to 3 to take stringent action against the respondents 4 and 5 for their illegal activities like threatening, collecting money, imposing fine, banning the participants, etc in the Reckla races, based on the representation, dated 11.09.2025.For Petitioner: Mr.B.Saravanan for Mr.Rm.Arun SwaminathanFor R1 and R3 : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram Additional Public Prosecutor For R2: Mr.A.Oli Raj, Government Advocate (Civil)For R4: Mr.NR.Elango, Senior Counsel for Mr.S.BageerathanFor R5 and R6: Mr.M/s.Gokul Abi Manyuo.R ORDER This petition is filed for an issuance of a Writ of Mandamus to the respondents 1 to 3 to take stringent action against the respondents 4 and 5 for their illegal activities like threatening, collecting money, imposing fine, 2/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025banning the participants, etc in the Reckla races, based on the representation, dated 11.09.2025.2. It is the case of the petitioner that he has 15 country bulls and participates in the reckla race in and around Sivagangai District; that reckla race is one among the ancient Bullock races in the rural areas of southern and western Tamil Nadu; that the reckla race was banned by the State and thereafter, the ban was lifted pursuant to an order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court; that the petitioner has been conducting reckla races within the legal framework and no untoward incidents have been reported; that while so, the respondents 4 and 5, claiming to be an Association with its object of promoting traditional sports like reckla races and also to protect the welfare of the bulls, are illegally banning races, which are conducted by certain individuals and are banning certain individuals and the bulls from participating in the races for alleged violation of rules and also imposing fines; that the respondents 4 and 5 have no legal authority to do so; and hence, such actions have to be prevented and have sought for the above prayer. 3(a). Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent would however, submit the Association was formed with the 3/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025objective to promote, preserve and regulate the traditional reckla (Bullock Cart) races in Tamil Nadu, to protect indigenous breeds of bulls and welfare of Cartman and Vice Cartman, to conduct events in a safe and lawful manner adhering to Government regulations and to provide financial assistance to members or participants affected during such events.(b) The learned Senior Counsel would therefore submit that it is necessary to preserve the reckla race as well as to protect the animals from being subjected to cruelty and therefore, there is no harm in the 4th respondent association, which was instrumental in filing cases and lifting the ban to conduct reckla race to control the manner in which the races have to be conducted and if there is any violation of law and cruelty to animals, they are entitled to prevent the same. 4. The learned counsel for the 5th respondent would adopt the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel for the fourth respondent and would submit that the Association is only acting in the welfare of all the participants concerned and the bulls.5. It is not in dispute that the respondents 4 and 5 are banning persons 4/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025from participating in their races and also imposing fines. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is not a member of the respondents 4 and 5. If the respondents 4 and 5, who claim to protect the interest of the animals and the sport itself, are aggrieved by any action of the individuals, they cannot take law into their own hands. The respondents 4 and 5 can only set the law in motion, if there is any violation or an offence committed by any individual person or if there is any cruelty committed to any bull. Further, even if there is any other violation not amounting to an offence, the respondents 4 and 5 can always seek other remedies to prevent such violations. The respondents 4 and 5 therefore cannot, in the guise of protecting the interests of the bulls, restrict any individual or impose fines on any individual as aforesaid.6. Therefore, if there is any complaint from the petitioner or from any third party, that the respondents 4 and 5 are illegally preventing them from participating in any race, it is open to the official respondents to take action. At the same time, if any individual causes cruelty to animals and violates any provision of law, the official respondents shall take action against them as well. The respondents 4 and 5 can always approach the official respondents for that purpose.5/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 20257. However, it is made clear that the respondents 4 and 5 cannot be prevented from imposing any condition on its members and this order would not have any bearing in such cases.8. With the above observations, this Writ petition is disposed of. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.20.11.2025NCC : Yes / NoIndex : Yes / NoInternet : Yes/ NoIndu/dk To1.The Director General of Police, Chennai.2.The Inspector General of Registration, Santhome High Road, Chennai.3.The Superintendent of Police, Sivagangai.4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,6/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025 Madurai. 7/8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis W.P.Crl.(MD)No.1540 of 2025SUNDER MOHAN, J.Indu/dkW.P.Crl.(MD).No.1540 of 202520.11.20258/8