Don’t grant permission for public gatherings targeting judges, Madras High Court directs Tamil Nadu police

You don’t have any Active Subscription.

Subscribed with another email? Logout and Login with that one.

Your active subscription(s)

Account subscription benefits alongside Premium Stories, Editorials, Opinions and more. Unlock these with Subscription

Products you've access to

Additional Subscription Benefits

Need help with your subscription?

Updated - October 30, 2026 12:00 pm IST - CHENNAI

Madras High Court. File | Photo Credit: K. Pichumani

The Madras High Court on Friday (October 30, 2026) directed the Tamil Nadu police not to grant permission for any public gathering or march that aims to personally target or intimidate a judge and to initiate appropriate legal action if a permitted gathering ends up making personal attacks against judges.

The First Division Bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan issued the directions while disposing of a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by R. Karthikeyan of Chennai, seeking a direction to the Centre as well as the State government to act against those who scandalise the judiciary.

“The State police and the district administration shall continuously evaluate all applications for public meetings, marches and protests regarding judicial matters on a strict case-to-case basis using the powers under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) and the local Police Act,” the Bench ordered.

It went on to state: “No permission shall be granted for any public gathering or march that aims to personally target or intimidate a sitting judge. If a permitted assembly turns into a personal attack, the officers concerned shall end the event immediately and take appropriate legal action.”

The judges also issued a few other directions after the PIL petitioner had brought to their notice the protests conducted by Tamil Nadu Thowheed Jamaath and Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam after a Bench led by Justice G.R. Swaminathan had ruled that converted Muslims were not entitled to reservations.

The petitioner insisted upon issuing a direction to the Union Ministry of Home Affairs, as well as the State government and the Director General of Police, to take effective preventive and penal measures against organised campaigns, public meetings, processions, demonstrations, speeches, social media publications, and other activities that scandalise, intimidate, or undermine the authority of the judiciary.

He said that the police should be directed to register criminal cases against those who make personal attacks against judges of constitutional courts and conduct a fair and expeditious investigation into all cognisable offences in accordance with law. The litigant also wanted appropriate guidelines to be framed governing the grant of permission for meetings, processions, and demonstrations related to judicial proceedings.

Published - October 30, 2026 11:57 am IST

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.