Madras High Court
M.Arasupandi vs The Commissioner Of Police on 20 June, 2025
Author: G.R.Swaminathan
Bench: G.R.Swaminathan
W.A(MD)No.1673 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 20.06.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.R.SWAMINATHAN
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.RAJASEKAR
W.A(MD)No.1673 of 2025
and
C.M.P(MD)No.9366 of 2025
M.Arasupandi ... Appellant /
Petitioner
Vs.
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City Police,
Madurai – 2.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Anna Nagar Circle,
Anna Nagar,
Madurai.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Anna Nagar Police Station,
Madurai. ... Respondents /
Respondents
Prayer: Writ Appeal filed under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent to set aside the
order dated 13.06.2023 passed in Writ Petition Crl(MD)No.185 of 2025 and
allow the above writ petition by allowing this Appeal.
1/16
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
W.A(MD)No.1673 of 2025
For Appellant : Mr.N.Ananthapadmanabhan
Senior Advocate
Mr.K.P.S.Palanivelrajan
Senior Advocate
for Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy
For Respondents : Mr.R.Baskaran
Additional Advocate General
Assisted by
Mr.T.Senthil Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
JUDGMENT
(Judgment of the Court was made by G.R.Swaminathan J.)
This Writ Appeal is directed against the order dated 13.06.2025 made in
W.P.Crl(MD)No.185 of 2025. Hindu Munnani has proposed to conduct a
conference of the devotees of Lord Muruga on 22.06.2025 from 03.00 p.m to
08.00 p.m in the city of Madurai near Vandiyur Toll Plaza, Pandi Kovil Ring
Road. Permission for conducting the conference had been granted by the
Assistant Commissioner of Police, Anna Nagar Range, Madurai Greater City
(North) vide proceedings dated 12.06.2025. However, it was subject to as
many as 52 conditions. The organisers feel aggrieved by condition No.7. It
reads as follows:
“khehl;bw;F tUk; thfdq;fs; me;je;j khtl;lj;jpw;Fl;gl;l
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
cl;Nfhl;l fhty; Jiz fz;fhzpg;ghsh; mYtyfj;jpy;
Kiwahf tpz;zg;gpj;J chpa Mtzq;fis (RC Book,
Driving License, Aadhar Card) rkh;gpj;J Vehicle Pass ngw;Nw
khehl;bw;F tuNtz;Lk;. Xt;nthU kz;lyj;jpw;nfd;W
ntt;NtW epw Pass-fs; toq;fg;gLk;. KiwNa njw;F
kz;lyj;jpw;F gr;ir ewKk; tlf;F kz;lyj;jpw;F
nts;is epwKk; kj;jpa kz;lyj;jpw;F ePy epwKk; Nkw;F
kz;lyj;jpw;F kQ;rs; epwKk; gpw khepyq;fSf;F rptg;G
epw Pass-fSk; toq;fg;gLk;. mt;thW Vehicle Pass
ngwhky; khehl;bw;F tUk; thfdq;fs; kJiu khefUf;Fs;
mDkjpf;fg;gl khl;lhJ.”
Questioning the said condition, the appellant filed W.P.Crl(MD)No.185 of
2025. The learned single Judge however declined to interfere with the said
condition. The learned single Judge observed as follows:
“28.The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
has raised serious objections with regard to condition No.7
that apart from the members of their organisation, common
devotees may also attend the event and it would be difficult
for the common devotees to approach the Deputy
Superintendent of Police to apply and to obtain vehicle
pass. This condition, according to the learned Additional
Advocate General is only to organise the vehicles, which
are supposed to take part in the event and also to prevent
any vehicle procession.
29.The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
submits that they are not having plan to conduct vehicle
procession in any form. This Court is of the view that this
condition has been imposed in order to regulate the
vehicles which are likely to participate in the event. If any
participant applies for the vehicle pass, the police officer
concerned shall issue the vehicle pass within 24 hours of
the application. There is no reason to interfere with the
condition. In the event, if the police refuse to grant vehicle
pass, it has to be rejected with valid reasons.”
Aggrieved by the same, the appellant herein moved the Hon'ble Supreme Court
of India by filing S.L.P(Crl)No.009176-009177 of 2025. It was disposed of in
the following terms:
“1. Mr.Sidharth Luthra, learned senior counsel submits
that recently the High Court has taken a view that the nature of
orders which are assailed in the instant special leave petitions
are amenable to challenge in the Letters Patent Jurisdiction.
2. He, thus, prays for liberty to withdraw the instant
special leave petitions so that the petitioner can avail suitable
remedy before the High Court.
3. Accordingly, the special leave petitions are disposed
of as withdrawn with liberty, as prayed for.”
Availing the liberty granted by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Writ Appeal
has been filed.
2.The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant primarily
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
contended that the imposition of the impugned condition is violative of the
fundamental right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of
India. According to him, this condition is unreasonable and onerous. He also
contended that the Assistant Commissioner, Anna Nagar Range, Madurai City
lacks the jurisdiction to stipulate such a condition. He pointed out that when
similar conferences far greater in magnitude were organized in Madurai City in
the very recent past by the political parties, such a condition had not been
stipulated. He also cited certain practical difficulties in complying with the
impugned condition. He lamented that the Police authorities are making the
pass-applicants run from pillar to post. The Police are said to be deliberately
delaying the issuance of passes. According to him, the object of the State
appears to be to put spokes in the wheels and discourage the participants from
attending the conference. He called upon this Court to intervene in this matter.
3.Per contra, the learned Additional Advocate General submitted that the
authority is very much competent to impose such a condition. According to
him, the right to participate is not being denied. On the other hand, it is only
being regulated to maintain law and order. He relied on Section 41(1) of the
Madras City Police Act, 1888 in support of his contention. He called upon us
to sustain the impugned condition and dismiss this Writ Appeal.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
4.We carefully considered the rival contentions and went through the
materials on record.
5.We read and re-read the said condition. It states that no vehicle
carrying the conference participants without a vehicle pass will be allowed to
enter Madurai City limits. It also states that such a vehicle pass has to be
obtained from the respective offices of Deputy Superintendent of Police. The
applicants have to submit RC book, driving license and Aadhar card. We fail to
understand as to how such a condition could have been imposed by the
Assistant Commissioner of Police, Anna Nagar Circle, Madurai in the first
place. An Assistant Commissioner can have jurisdiction and sway only over
her territorial limits. She could not have issued an order preventing entry of
vehicles into Madurai city. Right to movement throughout the territory of India
is guaranteed to all citizens under Article 19(1)(d) of the Constitution of India.
It is open to any citizen to enter Madurai city in his/her vehicle and such a right
cannot be interfered with by an Assistant Commissioner of Police.
6.The learned Additional Advocate General would claim that Section
41(1) of the City Police Act, 1888 confers such a power. The said provision
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
reads as follows:
“Section 41 - Power to regulate assemblies, meetings and
processions in public places, etc.
(1) The Commissioner or, subject to his orders, any Police
Officer above the rank of head constable, may, from time to time,
as occasion may require direct the conduct of all assemblies,
meetings and processions in public places ; prescribe the routes
by which and the times at which such processions may pass ;
keep order in public places and prevent obstructions on the
occasion of such assemblies, meetings and processions, and in
the neighbourhood of places of worship during the time of public
worship and in any case when public places may be thronged or
liable to be obstructed ; and may licence and regulate or
prohibit the use of music or of sound amplifiers in any area.”
7.Let us now parse the above provision: The Commissioner or any Police
officer above the rank of head constable may -
a) direct the conduct of all assemblies, meetings and
processions in public places ;
b) prescribe the routes by which and the times at which such
processions may pass ;
c) keep order in public places and prevent obstructions on
the occasion of such assemblies, meetings and processions, and in
the neighbourhood of places of worship during the time of public
worship and in any case when public places may be thronged or
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
liable to be obstructed ;
d) may licence and regulate or prohibit the use of music or
of sound amplifiers in any area.
8.The above provision can be understood to confer power on the officer
concerned to deal with meetings and processions within his/her jurisdiction.
No officer exercising power under this said provision can pass an order having
operation beyond his/her territorial limits. An Assistant Commissioner, Anna
Nagar Range, does not have sway over the entire Madurai city. In any event,
she cannot forbid entry of motor vehicles into Madurai city. The impugned
condition has to go on the sole ground of jurisdiction.
9.The learned Additional Advocate General vehemently contended that
the impugned condition cannot be said to be unreasonable. He, of course, does
not deny that when conferences were conducted by certain political parties in
Madurai city recently, no such condition was imposed. Article 19(1)(d) states
that all citizens shall have the right to move freely throughout the territory of
India. Of course, this fundamental right is not an absolute right. It is subject to
the restriction set out in Article 19(5) of the Constitution of India. Article 19(5)
is as follows:
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
“19. Protection of certain rights regarding freedom of speech,
etc.
(5) Nothing in sub-clauses (d) and (e) of the said clause shall affect the
operation of any existing law in so far as it imposes, or prevents the State
from making any law imposing, reasonable restrictions on the exercise of
any of the rights conferred by the said sub-clauses either in the interests of
the general public or for the protection of the interests of any Scheduled
Tribe.”
10.Thus the right of movement can be curtailed only on two grounds:
a) interest of general public
b) protection of interests of scheduled tribe
11.We have to see if such a condition had been imposed by a competent
authority, it can pass muster. The authorities themselves have chosen to grant
permission for holding the conference. Thus no exception can be taken to the
conduct of the event. The organisers have made it clear that the event would be
religious in character and that no negative note would be struck. It is in this
background, the validity of the impugned condition has to be examined. If a
banned meeting is to be held, and persons are expected to converge in the
venue from various places, the competent authority can certainly impose a
condition regarding the entry of vehicles or even the movement of people.
Such is not the case here.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
12.When the election commission clamped order under Section 144 of
Cr.P.C throughout the Union Territory of Pondicherry, it was challenged by a
political party in W.P.No.8980 of 2021. The Hon'ble First bench vide order
dated 04.04.2021 observed as follows:
“8. Thankfully, this country allows expansive freedom to
its citizens and, as the Constitution provides, there cannot be any
authoritarian regime possible in the country nor any
regimentation of the citizens or their lives. However, for the
purpose of maintaining law and order and in public interest,
certain restrictions may be imposed; but such restrictions have
always to be reasonable, proportional to the anticipated problem
and the decision in such regard is always justiciable.
9. Every citizen in a free country can do anything lawful
that the citizen chooses and even the slightest of restriction on
the citizens' movement has to be justified. ..”
13.In the case on hand, no justification has been shown in support of the
impugned condition. It is neither reasonable nor proportionate. The authorities
have not specified the problems anticipated by them and not demonstrated as to
how insistence on vehicle passes would quell the problem. On the other hand,
we are satisfied that grave inconvenience will be caused to the participants. A
person can decide to attend the conference even a day before the event. The
conference is to be held only from 03.00 p.m to 08.00 p.m. A person residing in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
Ramanathapuram may decide to attend the conference literally at the last
moment. He may like to drive down to Madurai in his car. If the impugned
condition is upheld, his right to attend the conference will be taken away.
Article 19(1)(b) states that all citizens shall have the right to assemble
peaceably and without arms. Thus the fundamental right guaranteed under this
Article is also involved.
14.We are a republican democracy. Just as ease of doing business is
important, the ease of participation in democratic gatherings is equally vital.
The authorities ought not to come in the way of the citizens exercising their
democratic right. Calling upon the citizen to go the office of the DSP and take
a pass may not look objectionable on the face of it. But in reality, things work
out otherwise. The learned senior counsel recounted some of the experiences.
An applicant went to the office of the DSP who asked him to go to the
jurisdictional Inspector. The jurisdictional Inspector in turn asked him to come
the next day. It is not easy to walk into the office of a DSP. One has to wait
sometime, even for hours together. Why should a citizen who is entitled to
participate in a conference which has been legally permitted to be conducted be
subjected to such inconveniences? This in our view is not a proportionate or
reasonable approach towards the issue.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
15.In P.Nedumaran Vs State of Tamil Nadu [1999 (1) L.W.(CRI) 73], it
was observed as follows:
“Para 15: "The rights conferred on the citizens by Article 19 of the
Constitution are precious rights and are not to be lightly breached or
restricted by the State or any functionary of the State. Any regulation of
exercise of those rights must be for the purposes specified in Article
19 of the Constitution itself, and that power must be so exercised as to
subserve the larger public good. The power to impose restrictions is not
the power which is available for exercise in an arbitrary manner or for
the purpose of promoting the interest of those in power, or for
suppressing dissent Democracy can be made dynamic an truly alive
only when there is free market for ideas and discussion and debate is
not only permitted but is encouraged. All expression of opposing view
point cannot be regarded as dangerous to the safety or security of the
country and all expressions which do not find the approval of those
exercising the power of the State cannot be regarded as harmful to the
State and to the public order.
Para 16: The power conferred on the Commissioner under Section
41 of the Madras City Police Act is sweeping, that power is meant to be
exercised with great care and caution. The Madras City Police Act is a
pre-Constitution enactment, and the powers conferred on the authorities
at a time when the country was under the colonial regime, and during
the period when suppression of dissent was considered to be a
legitimate policy of the State, cannot be exercised after the enactment of
the Constitution in the same manner, as it was exercised earlier. The
Intelligence Report placed before the Court shows that the police still
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
have the attitude which does not seem to recognise that the country is a
democratic nation, where every citizen has a right to full and equal
participation in the process of Government. No citizen can be regarded
as an enemy of the State merely because he has voiced a view which is
not the one favoured by those in authority.
Para 17: The fact that the police are vested with power should not make
them assume that, that power is available for exercise in any manner
that they consider fit. That power is to be exercised strictly within the
ambit of the provisions of the Constitution, more particularly, the
requirement that any restriction placed on the exercise of fundamental
rights should be a reasonable restriction, and the restrictions so placed
should be shown to be essential, having regard to the permissible
purpose for which restrictions may be imposed.”
The aforesaid observations were approved by the Hon'ble Division Bench in
C.J.Rajan Vs Deputy Superintendent of Police (W.P.No.13681 of 2007).
16.If the object of the Police authority is to gather the details and
particulars about the vehicles entering the area where the event is to be held, it
can be very easily achieved by employing a very simple technology such as
scanning the license plates of vehicles. From this, information about the
owners can be easily obtained. In the case on hand, not more than 10,000
vehicles are expected and therefore, there is no need to impose such an onerous
condition. At the end of the day, the constitutional Courts have to balance the
fundamental rights of the citizens with the larger public interest. It has not been
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
shown to us as to how the impugned condition would serve larger public
interest at all. Though the learned Additional Advocate General would claim
that the impugned condition is only regulatory, in effect it would result in
discouraging the participants from easily accessing the conference venue.
17.To address the concerns expressed by the authorities, the appellant
had undertaken that the participants who come in their personal vehicles or
hired vehicles would deposit the photostat copies of RC book, insurance
certificate and driving license in the Police booths maintained by the Madurai
city Police at the various parking places earmarked by the event organiser. The
organisers undertake to extend their fullest co-operation in ensuring that the
event takes place peacefully. The undertaking affidavit filed by the appellant is
taken on record.
18.We cannot lose sight of the fact that a religious assembly is proposed
to be held. It may not be at a recognized place of worship. But then, the
character of the conference will have to be borne in mind. We have intervened
primarily for two reasons: a) lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Police
officer who stipulated the impugned condition and b) the lack of justification.
The impugned condition imposed by the Assistant Commissioner of Police is
not a statutory provision for us to read it down and sustain the same. Either the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
condition stays as a whole or it goes. Once we find that the Assistant
Commissioner could not have issued a blanket prohibitory order restraining the
entry of vehicles into Madurai city without a vehicle pass for the conference
participants, then we have to necessarily strike it down. We are of the view that
the fundamental rights of the citizens cannot be interfered with without strong
reasons which are totally absent in this case. We make it clear that the scope of
this writ petition is confined to the power of the Assistant Commissioner of
Police who has jurisdiction over a section of the Madurai city to pass an order
of this nature. We have not touched on any other aspect. The organisers assure
us that pucca arrangements have been made so that there is no stampede which
was witnessed in Bangalore, Delhi and other places recently.
19.In this view of the matter, the order of the learned single Judge is
modified and the impugned Condition No.7 is set aside. This Writ Appeal is
allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
[G.R.S., J.] [K.R.S., J.]
20.06.2025
NCC : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Index : Yes / No
MGA
Note: Issue order copy on 20.06.2025.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
G.R.SWAMINATHAN, J
and
K.RAJASEKAR, J.
MGA
To
1.The Commissioner of Police,
Madurai City Police,
Madurai – 2.
2.The Assistant Commissioner of Police,
Anna Nagar Circle,
Anna Nagar,
Madurai.
3.The Inspector of Police,
Anna Nagar Police Station,
Madurai.
and
20.06.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 20/06/2025 07:12:10 pm )
