Many People Being Affected By Damage Taking Place During Political Party Meetings; Must Be Compensated: Madras High Court

The Madras High Court, on Wednesday, said that many people were being affected by the damages that were taking place during the public meeting of the political parties, and steps had to be taken to compensate them effectively.

Justice N Sathish Kumar noted that usually, when some incident takes place during the public meetings resulting in damage to public property, an FIR is registered and the case goes on for a long time. The court added that in many cases, the people who actually suffer the loss are not properly compensated.  

"So many people are being affected by these damages that are taking place during the public meetings. They are not being compensated. Steps have to be taken," the court said. 

The court has now impleaded the Tamil Nadu Chief Secretary and the Home Secretary in furtherance of its earlier order directing the State to bring in rules asking all political parties to deposit a fixed amount while seeking permission for public meetings, which could be used towards payment of compensation in case of damage to public property. 

The direction was issued in a plea filed by Actor Vijay's Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam party seeking directions to the Director General of Police to instruct all his subordinate officers to grant permissions for conducting political campaigns by the party, considering their representations in a fair, uniform, and non-discriminatory manner within a time frame fixed by the court.

When the matter was taken up today, Additional Public Prosecutor Raj Tilak sought time to bring in a Standard Operating Procedure for the collection of such deposits. He submitted that at present, there was no provision of law which permitted the State or the Police to collect a deposit before the conduct of the public meeting. He further submitted that at present, compensation would be sought from the concerned political party after the public meeting.

To this, the court said that what was needed was the will of the State and not a provision. The court remarked that similar deposits were obtained in cases of commercial contract/commercial transactions and even in the case of tenancy. Similarly, the court suggested that a deposit can be sought from the party.

"It's not a provision that is needed. What's needed is your will. Bring in a policy," the court told the Additional Public Prosecutor.

The court stressed that a lot of people were being affected by damage that was being caused during these public meetings. The court noted that usually, after some incident had taken place, the police would file an FIR against the concerned political party, and the case would go on. The court added that in most cases, the persons affected did not get the compensation, and it was thus necessary to protect their interests.

The court also expressed strong disapproval of the manner in which the affidavit was filed by the Assistant Inspector General of Police when the Director General of Police was the respondent in the case. Though the APP informed the court that the affidavit was filed after getting the approval of the DGP, the court noted that the affidavit should have been filed by the DGP himself and expressed strong disapproval in the manner in which such affidavits were being filed. 

When certain political parties submitted that they wanted to be impleaded into the case, the court asked the parties to deposit Rs. 5 Lakh to show their credentials. The court said that the parties could not keep coming and joining the petition for publicity, and must show their credentials.

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.

It was submitted 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.

During the previous hearing, the State had produced photographs showing how the party workers had conducted themselves in the recent meeting, causing damage to the public property. This prompted the court to suggest that a rule could be brought in, which would be made applicable to all political parties, asking them to deposit money towards compensation for damage to public property.

The matter will now be taken up on October 16.

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

Case No: WP Crl 884 of 2025