Madras HC Slams Tamil Nadu Police For Citing Mosques And Minority Unease To Deny RSS Route Marches

The Madras High Court on Thursday criticised the Tamil Nadu Police for pointing to mosques along procession routes, and to supposed unease among minority communities, as reasons to refuse permission for Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) route marches.

Justice V Lakshminarayanan, while dictating his order, said it was a matter of “agony” that the police were suggesting minority communities had a problem with the RSS processions. He noted that earlier court orders had already turned down such reasoning.

The petition challenges the police refusal to allow RSS marches planned around the organisation’s annual Vijayadashami celebrations. According to the Court, the RSS had asked for permission at 128 locations across the State, but the police were ready to allow processions at only 58 of them.

The judge recalled that Justice G Jayachandran had earlier ruled that mosques or churches on a route, possible traffic congestion, and the presence of groups with opposing ideologies cannot justify a refusal. That ruling had called such objections “lame”. Yet the police, the Court found, had again relied on largely the same grounds that were rejected in previous years.

The Court also took exception to the police referring to incidents linked to the banned Popular Front of India (PFI) while opposing the marches. It asked whether anyone from the Muslim community had actually objected to the RSS processions. “Don’t give Muslims a bad name,” the judge remarked.

Tracing the history of the dispute, the Court noted that the High Court had allowed RSS processions in September 2022, and that the Supreme Court dismissed the State’s challenge to that decision on April 11, 2023. Even so, similar disputes kept returning to the courts every year.

Justice Lakshminarayanan observed that guidelines issued by Justice Jayachandran on March 11, 2024 were meant to end this cycle of repeated litigation. However, he found that neither the RSS nor the State authorities had fully followed them.

The Court pointed out that the RSS applications were incomplete. They did not mention alternative routes or the names of the persons responsible for conducting the processions and public meetings. Expressing disappointment with both sides, the judge said the faith the Court had placed in the parties appeared “entirely misplaced”.

The Court also noted that a great deal of judicial time had been spent on litigation that should never have arisen, and stressed that organisers and police alike must follow the existing guidelines instead of approaching the judiciary repeatedly over the same issue.

To settle the matter, the Court directed the RSS to file an affidavit giving the proposed routes, the expected number of participants and details of local organisers, as required under the March 2024 guidelines. The organisation must also undertake to strictly follow the conditions set by the High Court.

The marches, first proposed for October 18, have been pushed back. Processions in the northern districts will now be held on October 25, and those in the southern districts on November 1.

Once the affidavit is filed, the Advocate General has been asked to take instructions from the Director General of Police. Local RSS organisers were told to give the required particulars to the Superintendents of Police of their respective areas.

The case will be heard next on October 16.

Senior Advocate NL Rajah appeared for the petitioner on behalf of advocate V Chandrasekaran. The State was represented by Advocate General Vijay Narayan, assisted by State Public Prosecutor John Sathyan and APP Arun Anbumani.

Background

The matter had come up a day earlier, on Wednesday, when the Court took a sharply critical view of the State’s approach. Orally, Justice Lakshminarayanan asked why Tamil Nadu police denied the RSS permission every year, when marches were allowed even in a terrorism-affected region like Jammu and Kashmir.

He remarked that the present government appeared to be against processions in general, whether by the RSS or the Dravidar Kazhagam, and that citizens were being treated like enemies. The Advocate General had argued that permission was refused because the proposed venue was not notified for public meetings, and that police were stretched during the festive season.

The judge asked what was exceptional this year and sought specific instances of violence by RSS marches. He also suggested the State bring a law banning marches if it wished to refuse every request. Senior Advocate NL Rajah argued that smaller parties lack the means to approach courts. The Court had then asked counsel to meet the State Public Prosecutor to find a peaceful, workable solution before Thursday’s resumed hearing.

Case Title: V.G. Jagadeesan v. The State Rep. By, The Chief Secretary and Others

Date of Hearing: October 15, 2026

Bench: Justice V Lakshminarayanan