Supreme Court Agrees To Hear TN Govt Challenge To Madras HC Relaxing Conditions For RSS Route March On Mar 3

Update: 2023-03-01 05:20 GMT
story

The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear on Friday (March 3) the petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Government challenging the order of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, which set aside conditions imposed by the Single Judge on the route march sought to be carried out by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in the State.Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi mentioned the matter on...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday agreed to hear on Friday (March 3) the petition filed by the Tamil Nadu Government challenging the order of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court, which set aside conditions imposed by the Single Judge on the route march sought to be carried out by the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) in the State.

Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi mentioned the matter on behalf of the State before the Chief Justice of India for urgent listing, saying that the march is scheduled on March 5.

Rohatgi said that the State had taken a call that in six districts "affected PFI, bomb blasts etc", the march can be allowed only with conditions such as it has to be done in compounds and stadiums. The single bench accepted the conditions but the division bench reversed it.

The Division Bench had passed the order in a petition filed by RSS assailing the order of the Single Judge modifying its earlier order allowing procession. The RSS impugned the order on the ground that the Single Judge could not have carried out the modifications in a contempt petition alleging wilful disobedience. The restrictions imposed by the Single Judge includes directions to organise the processions in compound premises such as grounds and stadium; directions to not carry sticks, lathis or other weapons that might cause injury. The RSS argued that public processions are an acceptable manner of exercising one’s freedom of speech and expression and the State is duty bound to permit the same. Moreover, the challenge was also sustained on the ground that the Single Judge noted that there was no significant material in the Intelligence reports. The RSS vehemently opposed reliance on public opinion and press reports arguing that the same cannot take the face of evidence.

The State police had averred that the denial of permission was a policy decision based on intelligence reports. It had informed the Court that the decision was to ensure the safety of members of the organisation.


Tags:    

Similar News