Frame Rules For Public Meetings By Political Parties: Madras High Court Suggests To State In TVK's Plea For Permission To Hold Events

The petition, filed through the party's deputy General Secretary CTR Nirmal Kumar alleged that the unprecedented growth of the party has provoked resistance from the dominant political family in Tamil Nadu who were continuously obstructing the party's democratic activities.

The plea stated that the party cadres were often facing unwarranted difficulties in securing statutory permission from the police authorities to conduct political events, despite due compliance with all the legal requirements. It was also contended that the police used to impose discriminatory and onerous restrictions on the party, while granting liberal and favourable permissions to other political parties. It was argued that the stark disparity underscored the discriminatory treatment meted out to the party.

It was also submitted that though some of the conditions imposed on the party were incapable of strict compliance, the party had been scrupulously endeavouring to adhere to the conditions in order to maintain peace and discipline

Pointing to the previous conduct of the party in adhering to the conditions and maintaining law and order, it was submitted that the officials of the police, acting under political influence, failed to consider the genuine requisition in a fair and transparent manner. It was submitted that the colourable exercise of power, designed to stifle the lawful political activities of the party was a gross violation of Article 14, 19(1) (a), and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution.

The party further submitted that though they had made representations in this regard, no action had been taken on the same, prompting them to approach the High Court.

When the plea was taken up today, Additional Public Prosecutor Raj Thilak informed the court that permission had not been denied to the party, but certain conditions were imposed to ensure law and order. The Prosecutor also produced photographs showing how the party workers had conducted themselves in the recent meeting, causing damage to the public property. 

Senior Advocate V Raghavachari, appearing for the party argued that the police had imposed conditions that could not be fulfilled, while such conditions were not imposed on other political parties. "They have imposed conditions on the number of vehicles that should come, have said that pregnant women and differently-abled people should not come. How can we tell them not to come?" he asked. 

To this, the judge remarked that such conditions would be imposed on all parties and was to ensure a peaceful public meeting. The court also questioned whether compensation had been collected for the damage to public property that had taken place during the party's public meeting that happened in Trichy recently and warned that it would intervene if necessary. 

The court also orally remarked that Vijay, being the head of the party, should ensure that its meetings are conducted in a lawful manner, without any damage. The court also remarked that Vijay could set an example for others by asking pregnant women and differently abled people not to participate in the meeting, for their own well-being.

The court has adjourned the case to September 24 for further hearing.

Case Title: Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) v. The Director General of Police

Case No: WP Crl 884 of 2025