Bhuvana Marni
Published on: November 3, 2022 at 18:40 IST
On Wednesday, the Tamil Nadu police notified the Madras High Court that just 3 of the 50 places for which the RSS requested permission for the route march had been approved.
The government had ordered the party to conduct its procession indoors in 23 places. No permission was able to be given in the remaining 24 locations.
Senior Advocate NR Elango, representing the police, made submissions before a bench of Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan, arguing that the permission to enter in these locations was refused in light of the intelligence reports.
Elango claimed that the officials had examined the situation and opted against issuing permission in light of the Coimbatore Cylinder Blast.
Additionally, he claimed that because of the incessant rain, cops had to be stationed in different locations.
Additionally, he said that the State had no problems with the group holding its meetings in a secluded place. However, because this was a sensitive matter, the police had to take both the safety of the organization’s members and the law and order into mind.
“We have no problem with them holding meetings in closed space. But this is a sensitive issue. Who is responsible for law and order and their own safety? We are. Safety is much more important.”
“The authorities had taken a responsible decision. Paramount consideration of the court has to be the safety of its citizens,” Elango submitted.
Senior Advocate NL Prabakaran, who was representing the organisation, stated that the state had a duty to ensure to provide security for procession since it’s the right of the people of the country.
“It is the state’s duty. By citing a law and order situation, they cannot just deny permission. You can respond if I’m protesting or calling a bandh.” He said before the court, “I’m only asking permission to conduct a peaceful procession.”
Elango said that the court might review the intelligence reports pertaining to each area in which the details have been presented in response to claims that the Police were political in nature.
He continued by stating that they were supported by reports and were not just “presumptions” of the police.
The court decided to look into the detailed Intelligence Report and pass orders on Friday regarding the same.
Case Title: R Karthikeyan vs. K Phanindra Reddy IAS