WP CRL.(MD)/5111/2026 of Marukkan Vs The Superintendent of Police on 29 September 2026

ORDER

The prayer in the writ petition is to direct respondents 1 and 2 to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner and his family members to conduct pooja during the 177th annual Puratasi month Pongal festival to be celebrated from 06.10.2026 to 10.10.2026 at Arulmigu Sri Kaliamman Temple situated at Chinna Sakkilipatti, Sakkilipatti Panchayat, Nagamalai Pudhukottai, Madurai District by taking note of his representation dated 27.08.2026.

2. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondents 1 and 2 submitted that the respondent-police issued summons to the petitioner asking him to appear for an enquiry on 26.09.2026. But the petitioner did not attend the enquiry.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the summons for appearance was received by the petitioner only today. As per the

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )

instructions of the petitioner, the petitioner appeared today and the respondent-police told orally that having the petitioner filed a case, he has to approach the Court of law for any orders.

4. The learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that the petitioner is none other than the paternal uncle of the third respondent. The third respondent’s father was conducting pooja in the subject temple in the past. In this regard, the third respondent’s father viz., Alagan Poosari approached this Court in Crl.O.P.(MD) No.10388 of 2007 seeking direction to provide adequate security for the peaceful celebration of annual Puratasi festival of the subject temple.

5. The said criminal original petition was disposed of by an order of this Court dated 27.09.2007. This Court, in that order, made it clear that the petitioner therein cannot try to get any order asserting any right over any position as poosari. However, directed the petitioner therein to appear before the Deputy Superintendent of Police concerned with a requisition and there upon, the Deputy Superintendent of Police shall consider relating to police protection for the peaceful conduct of the festival. It was once again reiterated that the said order shall not be considered as declaring the right of anyone to conduct the festival. For better clarity, paragraph Nos.5 and 6 of the said order dated 27.09.2007 are extracted below:

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )

“5. I would like to make it clear that the petitioner by approaching this Court, cannot try to get any order asserting any right over any position as poosari and I would also like to make it clear that this Court is not declaring his claim as the poosari of that temple, however, he would submit that peace has to be maintained in that area. In such a case, the following direction is issued: Immediately on receipt of a copy of this order, the petitioner shall appear before the Deputy Superintendent of Police concerned with a requisition and thereupon the Deputy Superintendent of Police shall consider relating to police protection for the peaceful conduct of the festival. I once again reiterate that this order shall not be considered as declaring the right of any one to conduct the festival.

6. With the above direction, this petition is closed.”

6. By citing the above order, the learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that even the third respondent’s father has right as per the order of this Court for conducting poojas, the petitioner has no right at all. Alagu Poosari died in the recent past and thereafter, the third respondent is conducting pooja. Therefore, having no right claiming anyone as poosari to the subject temple, this Court may take better call and pass suitable orders.

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )

7. In view of the above, the request of the petitioner for police protection to conduct the pooja is to be decided by the respondent-police as per the above order of this Court and the matter is left open to the respondent-police to decide the same and dispose of the petitioner’s representation dated 27.08.2026 within a period of three days from today.

8. This Court directs the petitioner as well as the third respondent to go to the civil Court to exercise their right and get a decree.

9. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that as per paragraph No.7 of the affidavit, the elders in the village have decided to allow the petitioner to conduct the pooja.

10. The said submission cannot be accepted as a right vested with the petitioner and the petitioner may work out his remedy before the civil Court for exercising the performance of pooja in the manner known to law.

11. The petitioner and the third respondent are directed to appear before the second respondent-police on 01.10.2026 at 11.00 am. The second respondent-police is directed to enquire them, record the statement, collect any document about the right vested with the temple. However, the second respondent has to take a call as per the earlier order of this Court extracted above and delegate the parties to work out the civil remedy.

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )

12. With the above observations and directions, this Writ Petition stands disposed of.

13. The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) is requested to inform this order to the jurisdictional police to decide the petitioner’s application as per the orders of this Court.

29.09.2026 Note: Issue order copy by 30.09.2026 NCC : Yes/No Index: Yes/No Internet : Yes abr

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )

To

1. The Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai.

2. The Inspector of Police, Nagamalai Pudukkottai Police Station, Madurai District.

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )

DR. P.MURUGAN, J. abr W.P.(MD) No.5111 of 2026 Dated: 29.09.2026

( Uploaded on: 30/09/2026 08:23:53 pm )