SEKAR REPORTER

Court News from Madras High Court

Cont.P.No.2111 of 2022 and Sub.Appl.No.522 of 2022 in WP.No.25213 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J. This contempt petition has been filed to punish the respondents for the wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in WP.No.25213 of 2022 dated 22.09.2022, thereby this Court directed the respondents to grant permission to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 02.10.2022 at various places of Tamilnadu subject to the conditions on or before 28.09.2022. S.Prabakaran, the learned Senior Counsel appearing However, it is for the State to maintain law and order problem.  It is made clear that the respondents shall permit the petitioners on their earlier representations to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 06.11.2022. Registry is directed to list the matter along with all the connected contempt petitions numbered subsequently on 31.10.2022. 30.09.2022 .

by · Published · Updated

Cont.P.No.2111 of 2022 and Sub.Appl.No.522 of 2022 in WP.No.25213 of 2022 G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

This contempt petition has been filed to punish the respondents for

the wilful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in WP.No.25213 of 2022 dated 22.09.2022, thereby this Court directed the respondents to grant permission to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 02.10.2022 at various places of Tamilnadu subject to the conditions on or before 28.09.2022.

  1. The order passed by this Court was duly communicated to the

respondents. However, the respondents rejected the representation of the petitioners therein by an order dated 28.09.2022 seeking permission to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings to be held on 02.10.2022.

  1. S.Prabakaran, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the

petitioner submitted that though this Court directed the respondents to grant permission with certain conditions, without obeying the order passed by this Court, the respondents rejected the representations for the reason that subsequent to the order passed by this Court, there is a ban on Popular Front of India and other connected organisations and it would create law and order problem. Whatever the ban, it is nothing to do with the order passed by this Court. The State is duty to bound to maintain the law and order issue, if any. Therefore, it is a clear willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court and they are liable to be punished for contempt of this Court. Further, in view of the above, the order of rejection cannot be sustained and it is liable to be set aside. He further submitted that in fact writ petition in W.P.No.24700 of 2022 was filed by one of the petitioner challenging the rejection order. This court set aside the rejection order and directed the respondents to grant permission to conduct procession and public meeting to be held on 02.10.2022.  However, the respondents wantonly and willfully again rejected the request and it is nothing but clear violation of the order passed by this Court. Therefore, the petitioner filed sub application seeking direction to permit the writ petitioners

to conduct procession public meeting to be held on 02.10.2022. Mr.G.Rajagopal, learned Senior Counsel and Mr.N.L.Rajah, learned Senior

Counsel also supported the contentions raised by Mr.S.Prabakaran, learned Senior Counsel and seeking permission to conduct procession and public meeting to be held on 02.10.2022.

  1. Per contra, Mr.N.R.Elango, the learned Senior Counsel appearing

for the first respondent submitted that due to the present law and order situation, the respondents rejected the representations seeking permission to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 02.10.2022. It is true that this Court directed the respondents to grant permission to the petitioners. After the order passed by this Court, the Union Government banned the organisation called ‘Popular Front of India’ and other similar various organisations for the period of five years on 28.09.2022. Due to which, there are threats from various sources to the leaders of petitioners organisations. Under these circumstances, the Government has to assess, in the context of the prevailing conditions, the impact of the steps taken to enforce law and order. It is the executive which has to take a policy decision as regards the steps to be taken in a given situation. While executing the order passed by this Court, the respondents cannot be oblivious of the possibility that while solving one problem of law and order, others more acute than the one sought to be solved may arise. He also relied upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Karnataka Live Band Restaurants Association Vs. State of Karnataka and Others reported in (2018) 4 SCC 372, wherein it is held as follows:

“38. There are two Latin legal maxims, which need

to be kept in mind while deciding the questions arising in this appeal. One is “Salus Populi Supremo Lex” which means the safety of the people is the supreme law and the other is “Salus republicae supremo lex” which means safety of the State is the supreme law.

  1. In our considered view, it is the prime duty,

rather statutory duty, of the Police personal/administration of every State to maintain and give precedence to the safety and the morality of the people and the State….”

Therefore, to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 02.10.2022 is not safe to all the general public and also the leaders of various political parties. Hence, the respondents rejected the request made by the petitioners for so many reasons by the order dated 28.09.2022.

4.1 Mr.Hasan Mohamed Jinnah, the learned State Public Prosecutor

also submitted that due to the ban order dated 28.09.2022, so far the respondents deployed 59,144 police personnels from the cadre of Deputy Superintendent of Police for the life and limb of various political leaders of the petitioner organisations and its allied political parties. If the petitioners are permitted to conduct procession on 02.10.2022, it will be very risk to their life and limb. In fact, the respondents have not only rejected the requests made by the petitioners and also other parties request to conduct procession for social unity and harmony on 02.10.2022.

  1. Hence, the respondents justified the reasons for rejecting the

request made by the petitioners. Therefore, it is not possible for the respondents to grant permission for the procession to be held on 02.10.2022. However, this Court suggested for any other date except Gandhi Jayanthi i.e. 02.10.2022 to conduct procession and to conduct public meeting.

  1. The learned Senior Counsels appearing for the petitioners

suggested four dates i.e. 09.10.2022, 16.10.2022, 06.11.2022 and 13.11.2022 and the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the first respondent submitted that except Gandhi Jayanthi on 02.10.2022, they will consider the same representations of the respective petitioners seeking permission to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on any other date.

  1. Considering the above submissions made on either side, this Court fix the date to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 06.11.2022. Till then, the petitioners are directed not to precipitate the issue.

However, it is for the State to maintain law and order problem.  It is made clear that the respondents shall permit the petitioners on their earlier representations to conduct procession and to conduct public meetings on 06.11.2022.

  1. Registry is directed to list the matter along with all the connected

contempt petitions numbered subsequently on 31.10.2022.

30.09.2022

lok

 

 

G.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.

lok

Cont.P.No.2111 of 2022 and

Sub.Appl.No.522 of 2022 in WP.No.25213 of 2022

30.09.2022

You may also like...