The Madras High Court on Thursday expressed anguish over the Tamil Nadu Police citing the presence of mosques and apprehensions involving minority communities as a ground to deny permission for route marches organised by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS). [Jagadeesan Vs State]

Justice V Lakshminarayanan observed that the police were unnecessarily portraying minority communities as being opposed to RSS processions, despite earlier judicial orders rejecting such grounds for refusing permission.

"It is a matter of agony that the police authorities are mentioning as if those belonging to the minority community are having issues with the procession being held by the petitioner's organisation," the judge said while dictating his order.

The Court was hearing a petition challenging the refusal of the Tamil Nadu Police to permit RSS route marches proposed as part of the organisation's annual Vijaya Dashami celebrations.

The RSS had sought permission to conduct processions at 128 locations across Tamil Nadu. However, the police were willing to permit marches at only 58 locations.

Justice Lakshminarayanan noted that an earlier ruling of Justice G Jayachandran had specifically rejected the presence of mosques and churches along procession routes, the possibility of traffic congestion and the existence of organisations holding ideologies opposed to the RSS, as grounds for refusing permission.

The earlier ruling had described these reasons as "lame".

Despite this, the police had once again relied on substantially similar grounds to reject the applications.

"Yet again, the police have chosen to reject it for reasons more or less the same reasons on which it had been rejected in the previous years," Justice Lakshminarayanan observed.

The judge also questioned the police for citing incidents involving the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) while opposing the processions.

During the hearing, he asked whether any members of the Muslim community had actually objected to the proposed RSS marches.

"Don't give Muslims a bad name," the judge remarked.

The Court also traced the history of litigation concerning RSS processions in Tamil Nadu since 2022.

It noted that the High Court had permitted the processions in September 2022 and that the Supreme Court subsequently rejected the State government's challenge on April 11, 2023.

Despite these orders, similar disputes continued to reach the judiciary.

Justice Lakshminarayanan observed that the guidelines framed by Justice Jayachandran on March 11, 2024, were intended to prevent repeated litigation over permission for RSS route marches.

However, the judge found that both the RSS and the State authorities had failed to fully comply with these guidelines.

The Court pointed out that the applications submitted by the RSS lacked particulars such as alternative routes and details of persons responsible for the processions and public meetings.

"The faith that the Court had on the parties seems to be entirely misplaced," the judge observed.

The Court noted that considerable judicial time had been spent on litigation that ought not to have arisen.

To resolve the dispute, Justice Lakshminarayanan directed the RSS to submit an affidavit containing the proposed routes, expected number of participants and details of local organisers in accordance with the March 2024 guidelines.

The organisation was also directed to undertake that it would strictly comply with the conditions imposed by the High Court.

The processions, originally proposed for October 18, were deferred to October 25 for the northern districts and November 1 for the southern districts.

The Advocate General was asked to obtain instructions from the Director General of Police upon receipt of the affidavit. Local RSS organisers were also directed to furnish the necessary particulars to the jurisdictional Superintendents of Police.

The Court emphasised that both the organisers and the police were expected to comply with the earlier guidelines rather than repeatedly approach the judiciary over the same dispute.

The case will be heard on October 16.

Senior Advocate NL Rajah appeared for the petitioner on behalf of advocate V Chandrasekaran

The State was represented by the Advocate General Vijay Narayan, assisted by the State Public Prosecutor John Sathyan and APP Arun Anbumani.