Facts
The petitioner challenged the third respondent’s order dated 11 October 2026 refusing permission for a Vel Yatra proposed for 18 October 2026.
Source reference: p. 2He had submitted representations seeking permission to conduct the procession.
Source reference: p. 2The State submitted that the proposed route was approximately five kilometres and could cause public inconvenience and law-and-order concerns; it suggested instead a procession of approximately one kilometre, from Alanganallur Murugan Temple to Alanganallur 15B Mettupatti village.
Source reference: p. 3The petitioner accepted that suggestion.
Source reference: p. 4Issues
1. Whether the refusal of permission for the proposed religious procession was justified by the stated concerns of public inconvenience and law and order
Source reference: pp. 3–42. Whether the procession could be permitted on a shorter route, subject to reasonable conditions for public safety and order
Source reference: pp. 4–5Law Applied
Article 25 of the Constitution protects the right to practise and profess religion, subject to public order, morality, health and the other provisions of Part III.
Source reference: p. 3Religious processions on public roads may be subject to reasonable regulation by competent authorities for public order, traffic management and public safety.
Source reference: p. 3Such regulatory power must be exercised on relevant grounds and not arbitrarily to deny a procession merely because of an apprehension of public inconvenience.
Source reference: p. 3Reasoning
The Court considered the State’s concerns about the proposed five-kilometre route but noted that the State had suggested a shorter route and the petitioner had accepted it.
Source reference: pp. 3–4Given the approaching procession date, the Court concluded that the procession could proceed on that route with police regulation and appropriate conditions, rather than allowing the impugned refusal to stand.
Source reference: pp. 4–5Holding
The Court set aside the impugned order and disposed of the petition, permitting the procession from Alanganallur Murugan Temple to Alanganallur 15B Mettupatti village.
It directed the police to give the petitioner a reasonable opportunity to provide details of the route, timing, duration and arrangements, and to regulate the procession in accordance with law.
Source reference: p. 5The petitioner was required to comply with the conditions imposed and conduct the procession peacefully; the exercise was to be completed before 18 October 2026.
Source reference: p. 5Original Court PDF
Rajesh KannanvsThe Superintendent of Police
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
