Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Madras High Court on Friday, last week issued an array of guidelines to the Police and the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for permitting and conducting future RSS route marches in Tamil Nadu.

While passing the order, the bench of Justice G Jayachandran stressed that authorities should remain impartial when granting citizens the opportunity to express their views. It emphasized that any restrictions imposed must meet the criteria of reasonable limitation. 

The bench said that in a populous and democratic country like India, processions, rallies, and public meetings are common throughout the year, serving as vital indicators of a vibrant democracy and the embodiment of freedom of thought and expression, therefore, those in positions of power should refrain from obstructing citizens' this right.

Court was dealing with a batch of contempt petitions pertaining to the high court's order allowing RSS route march. The contempt petitions were filed as the police did not grant permission to RSS members to conduct a route march wearing uniform, despite the court's order in April 2023. 

Meanwhile the contempt proceedings before the high court, the State preferred a Special Leave Petition (SLP) before the Supreme Court.

While noting that although the RSS route march is a nationwide event held annually around Vijayadasami, there came a recurring need for RSS members to resort to legal recourse due to the Tamil Nadu Government's refusal to grant permission, despite court directives, the top court directed the petitioner-authorities to present a proposal before the high court outlining measures to ensure future permissions for the respondent organization to conduct the route march without having to seek court intervention.

The high court, in its order, noted that with reverence to the Supreme Court's order, the respondent police had exchanged draft proposals with the organisers of the RSS local unit and they had also given in writing their re-joinder/objections.

In response to the objections, the Director General of Police had given the reasonings for the restrictions, which were disagreed by the organisers, the court pointed out while stating that the proposal, objections and reply were now before it to finalise the proposal/guidelines for RSS to conduct the Route March in future without seeking intervention of the Court. 

Therefore, deciding the issue, it emphasised that there could not be any hard and fast rule for the future to come, but it was possible to draw broad guidelines which were mandatorily to be followed by both the organisation and the police.

Hence, with necessary changes and elimination of conditions that did not clear the test of reasonable restriction, the high court approved the proposal of the DGP.

Case Title: G.Shanugam (Bala) Joint Secretary RSS, Tambaram v. Tmt.P.Amudha, I.A.S., and Others