Madras High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

   

Madras High Court: In a writ petition filed for directing the respondents to obtain a declaration from the organisers of all Dusshera Groups and Sound Hire Service Providers to prohibit singing and playing any non-devotional songs and ‘Kuthu Pattu’ during Dusshera festival at Arultharum Mutharamman Thirukovil, Thoothukudi District, the division bench of R. Mahadevan and J. Sathya Narayana Prasad, JJ., has directed the police authorities to prohibit obscene and vulgar dance performance during Dusshera Festival. The Court took note of the photographs of Dusshera festival, filed by the petitioner and observed that show that such dances are performed by paid dancers exhibiting obscene and vulgar postures making mockery of the traditional culture and customs to be followed in Dusshera festival and denigrating the Hindu religious sentiments. Further, portrayal of women in an indecent fashion itself is an offence under the provisions of the Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1981.

The Court noted that petitioner has initially filed seeking the very same relief for the Dusshera festival of the year 2017 and again in 2018. Wherein the Court has directed the authorities to ensure that there is no display of vulgarity or obscenity in connection with the temple festival of Arultharum Mutharamman.

The Court viewed that the petitioner has produced materials to substantiate his plea of exhibition of obscene and vulgar dance during the earlier Dusshera festival for the years 2017 and 2018. Thus, the apprehension of the petitioner to protect the traditional culture and customs of Dusshera festival from the vulgar and obscene dance performance, is well founded, and directed that the obscene and vulgar dance performance should be specifically prohibited by the Police authorities in the forthcoming festival and if anyone violates the same, appropriate action shall be taken against them in line with the Circular Memorandum dated 09.04.2019 issued by the Director General of Police, Tamil Nadu, that provides consolidated instructions regarding the procedures to be followed while granting permission to conduct cultural events, sports events, procession/meeting etc.

[B.Ramkumar Adityan v. District Collector, 2022 SCC OnLine Mad 4591, decided on 14.09.2022]


Advocates who appeared in this case :

For Petitioner: Advocate S. Sankar

For Respondents: Government Pleader P. Thilakkumar

Additional Public Prosecutor T. Senthil Kumar

Advocate M. Muthugeethayan

Kerala High Court
Case BriefsHigh Courts

Kerala High Court: R. Narayana Pisharadi, J. quashed the proceedings under Kerala Police Act, 2011 against the petitioner by invoking the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The facts of the case were that the Sub Inspector found petitioner making obscene gestures having sexual flavors, degrading the dignity of the women who were passing through the road. The Sub Inspector arrested the petitioner from the spot. The report was thus made after investigation, on which the petition was filed to quash the present application.

Sri. P. Rahul, learned counsel for the petitioner after completion of the investigation urged for the quashing of the proceedings on the ground that there was a lacuna in the investigation process and the police officer who detected the offence himself conducted the investigation thereby causing the prejudice to the petitioner. It was submitted that no woman was questioned by the police and civil police were cited as the witness to prove the incident. It was further submitted that the final report does not reveal the petitioner has committed any act punishable under Section 119(1)(a) of the Kerala Police Act, 2011.

Sheeba K.K., Public Prosecutor opposed the quashing of the petition on the ground that the offence alleged involves public interest and thus should not be quashed.

The Court held that the grounds alleged by the petitioner for quashing the present petition were not fatal to the prosecution case against the petitioner as there was no mandate that the act was to be done against the particular woman. Although on the ground that in the statement made in FIR and final report there was no disclosure by the two civil police officer of what was the obscene or sexual gesture or act performed by the petitioner which was necessary as the petitioner cannot be made guessing what is the specific allegation against him, the court decided to quash the proceedings. The court further directed  that complaint or the first information report, as the case may be, shall contain recital as to the specific gesture or act performed by the accused, which according to the prosecution, was degrading to the dignity of women and which would attract the offence under Section 119(1)(a) of the Act.[Arun v. State of Kerala, 2019 SCC OnLine Ker 1623, decided on 22-05-2019]