WP CRL.(MD)/5155/2026 of Rajasankar Vs The Superintendent of Police on 16 September 2026

O R D E R

Heard both sides.

2. This writ petition has been filed challenging the impugned order passed by the 2nd Respondent vide proceedings in Na.Ka.No.190/Ka.A/Ea.Ka.Va/2026 dated 28.08.2026 and quash the same as illegal and consequently, directing the 2nd respondent to grant permission and provide adequate police protection for temple consecration festival of the “Arulmigu Ayyammal Alagunatchi and Arulmigu Ramar Temple” situated at Kenjampatti, Dullukuttinayakkanur Village, Peraiyur Taluk, Madurai District, which is scheduled to be held on 17.09.2026.

3. The petitioner submitted a representation dated 28.08.2026 to the second respondent, seeking permission and adequate police protection to conduct the temple festival.

4. The impugned order passed by the second respondent states that the fourth respondent herein had already filed a petition before this Court in W.P.Crl.(MD)No.23163 of 2026, seeking permission to install a “Ramar Idol” in the subject temple, and that the said writ petition was considered and ultimately dismissed, granting liberty to the fourth respondent to approach the Civil Court for exercising his rights. Based on the writ petition filed by the fourth respondent, the date which was scheduled for kumbabishekam could not be jeopardized. The third respondent misinterpreted the judicial order, and rejected the petitioner's representation. Hence, the present writ petition has been filed.

5. The learned counsel for the fourth respondent submitted that, pursuant to the earlier order of this Court, the fourth respondent filed a civil suit on behalf of the public before the District Munsif Court, Peraiyur, in I.A.No.21 of 2026 in unnumbered O.S. of 2026, which is pending for consideration.

6. During the course of the arguments, though the fourth respondent made a U-turn that the petitioner would be directed to receive the Thalaikattu Vari and that the petitioner may permit the fourth respondent as well as other villagers to participate in the worship of the deity, the petitioner has agreed to permit the participation of the fourth respondent as well as the other villagers in the festival and also permit them to make any donation or contribution, but not in the nature of Thalaikattu Vari. As per the earlier order passed in the writ petition filed by the fourth respondent, no such relief has been granted to the fourth respondent, and the right relating to Thalaikattu Vari has to be agitated before the Civil Court.

7. Therefore, the learned counsel for the fourth respondent accepted the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner permitting the fourth respondent and the other villagers to participate in the festival on 17.09.2026. If the fourth respondent and the other villagers come forward to pay any amount in the nature of donation or gift, the petitioner or the organizing committee of the temple festival may receive the same and permit all the persons to participate in the temple for worship.

8. The learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) submitted that, though the permission may be granted by this Court by setting aside the impugned order passed by the second respondent, as far as the police protection is concerned, the police may have a very difficult task for the special reasons that, on 17.09.2026, in Madurai Town, the Kumbabishekam of the big and famous Meenakshi Sundareshwarar Temple is scheduled to be conducted. Therefore, all the police battalion and the neighboring district police battalion will be escorted in the said Kumbabishekam. Therefore, it would be difficult to provide adequate police protection for the present temple festival. The submission of the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) cannot be disputed by anybody.

9. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the fourth respondent hand shaked before this Court, saying that they will advice the parties to go ahead with the temple festival in a calm manner, without making any nuisance or trouble to each other. The submissions made by both the learned counsel are appreciated and recorded by this Court. Both the petitioner as well as the fourth respondent, along with the villagers, shall co-ordinate the advice of their respective counsel to celebrate the temple festival in a peaceful and respectful manner.

10. With the above direction, this writ petition is disposed of. 16.09.2026 Index :Yes/No Internet :Yes/No NCC :Yes/No psa

To

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

2. The Inspector of Police, Elumalai Police Station, Ealumalai, Madurai District.

3. The Sub Inspector of Police, M.Kallupatti, Police Station, M.Kallupatti, Madurai District.

4. The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

DR. P. MURUGAN, J. psa

WP.CRL.(MD). No.5155 of 2026

16.09.2026