“It is a classic case of using a scalpel, not for the purpose of an operation,” the Madras High Court said of the police as Justice V Lakshminarayanan cleared RSS route marches for October 25 and November 1.
Chennai: Permission for the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) to hold its Vijayadashami route marches and public meetings in Tamil Nadu on October 25 and November 1 was granted by the Madras High Court on Friday, which faulted the police for relying once more on reasons that had been considered and found wanting in earlier rounds of litigation [Jagadeesan v. State].
Justice V Lakshminarayanan heard Senior Advocate NL Rajah, instructed by advocate V Chandrasekaran, for the petitioner, and Advocate General Vijay Narayan, with State Public Prosecutor John Sathyan and Additional Public Prosecutor Arun Anbumani, for the State.
The Court on the police’s reasons
Several High Court and Supreme Court orders notwithstanding, the police had again relied on the same reasons and offered nothing new, the Court observed. It described the approach in these words:
It is a classic case of using a scalpel, not for the purpose of an operation
The police must not act like Procrustes, the mythical figure who forced people to fit his bed, the Court added; they should process applications for approval rather than hunt for defects to reject them. On the earlier day, the judge had asked whether any Muslim individual had actually objected to the marches and remarked that the minority community should not be given a bad name by being cited as a ground for refusal; he also questioned the police for citing incidents involving the banned Popular Front of India.
What the State told the Court, and what was directed
The Advocate General told the Court that the State agreed to the processions on the two dates, subject to modifications suggested by local police on the basis of conditions on the ground. The Court directed the police not to prolong the matter and to coordinate with the RSS organisers to finalise the timings and locations of the marches and the public meetings that follow by Monday, October 19. The RSS furnished details of the routes, organisers, expected participants and meeting venues, which the Court ordered to be annexed to its order to avoid later disputes.
The organisation also undertook to comply with the conditions imposed in earlier proceedings, and the Court urged organisers to file applications well in advance in future and expressed the hope that such disputes would stop taking up court time.
A dispute with a long history
The RSS State Secretary applied on October 3 for permission to hold route marches and public meetings as part of its Vijayadashami celebrations, proposing October 18, October 25 and November 1 as alternative dates. At an earlier hearing this week, the Court was told that the organisation had sought permission at 128 locations across the State, while the police were willing to allow it at 58. The police rejected the applications citing places of worship of other communities along the routes, statues of rationalist leaders, traffic congestion, the use of loudspeakers and possible law and order problems.
The High Court permitted RSS processions in September 2022, and the Supreme Court rejected the State government’s challenge to that permission on April 11, 2023. Justice G Jayachandran later rejected the presence of mosques and churches on a route, possible traffic congestion and the ideology of opposing organisations as grounds for refusal, calling them lame, and on March 11, 2024 he issued guidelines meant to prevent repeated litigation over the marches. At the previous hearing, Justice Lakshminarayanan found that both the RSS and the State had not fully complied with those guidelines.
Conditions, not refusal
The order reflects a settled line of rulings that permission for a lawful procession cannot be withheld repeatedly on grounds that courts have already examined, and that the remedy for genuine local concerns is reasonable conditions rather than refusal. The State’s concerns about law and order, traffic and sensitivities along routes remain open to be addressed through those conditions, which the police and the organisers are now to settle by October 19. The order records the parties’ positions and the Court’s directions; it expresses no view on the organisation’s ideology.
Case Title: Jagadeesan v. State
Bench: Justice V Lakshminarayanan, Madras High Court
Date of Order: October 16, 2026
Appearances: Senior Advocate NL Rajah, instructed by advocate V Chandrasekaran, for the petitioner; Advocate General Vijay Narayan, State Public Prosecutor John Sathyan and Additional Public Prosecutor Arun Anbumani for the State