Senthilkumar v. The Superintendent Of Police,

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED: 10-09-2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR Senthilkumar Appellant(s) Vs

1. The Superintendent of Police, Office of Superintendent of Police, Thiruvarur District.

2.The Inspector of Police Town East Police Station, Thiruvarur.

Respondent(s) PRAYER Calling for the records pertaining to the impugned order of the 2nd respondent herein in Na.Ka.85/B1.Na.Ka.A/Thiru /2025, dated 04.09.2025 and quash the same and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to give permission to set up speaker and mic arrangements during the protest based on the petitioner's representation dated 04.09.2025.

For Appellant(s):

Mr.G.Karthikeyan, Senior Counsel for M/s.A. Jagadeeswari For Respondents:

Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan, Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the impugned order of the 2nd respondent herein in Na.Ka.85/B1.Na.Ka.A/Thiru /2025, dated 04.09.2025 and and consequently direct the 2nd respondent herein to give permission to set up speaker and mic arrangements during the protest based on the petitioner's representation dated 04.09.2025.

2. It is the case of the petitioner that the festival commenced and proceeded well with the support and guidance of the Police. However, the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Tiruvarur led an attack on the devotees and prevented peaceful procession. Hence, he sought permission to raise objection as against the action of the Deputy Superintendent of Police, but the same was rejected and hence, the present petition.

3. The learned Public Prosecutor on instructions submitted that though permission was granted for procession between 4.00 p.m. and 8.00 pm on 18.08.025, the petitioner's group violated that condition and started the

procession at 7.45 pm. and conducted upto 4.30 a.m., which included some obscene dance, disturbance and causing nuisance to the general public. Therefore, taking note of the above violations, the permission sought for by the petitioner was not granted.

4. During arguments, videography is shown to Mr.Karthikeyan, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner.

5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.

6. In view of the above submissions, this Court is of the view that at present, there is no need to give permission to the petitioner to raise any such objection, taking note of the violations, which is apparent. However, in future if really there is any violation, fresh representation may be given to the authorities concerned and the same shall be considered on merits.

7. Mr.G.Karthikeyan, learned Senior Counsel is requested to advice the petitioner's group to not to involve in any such activities. If any one or two

person's involvement in such activities, will bring disrespect to the entire group and its leader.

8. With the above observations, this petition is closed. 10-09-2025 pvs Index:Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Internet:Yes

To 1.The Superintendent of Police, office of Superintendent of Police, Thiruvarur District.

2.The Inspector of Police Town East Police Station, Thiruvarur.

N.SATHISH KUMAR J.

pvs 10-09-2025