Today, the Apex Court, expressing its readiness to pose challenging questions on the merits of the case to the Tamil Nadu Government, has adjourned two Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) challenging the Madras High Court's decisions to grant permission to the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) for conducting route marches in the requested locations. The matter is scheduled to be reconsidered on November 6, 2023.

The Bench, led by Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta, chose not to issue a notice at this time. Instead, they adjourned the case to the upcoming Monday. The adjournment aims to allow the State of Tamil Nadu to furnish clarity regarding the existence of an intra-court appeal in the High Court and to address the question of the SLPs' maintainability before the Apex Court.

Justice Kant stated, "We are not commenting on the merits today but when you will convince us that it is maintainable then we will ask you certain questions, be ready for those. Today we are not on merits, first, we want to be convinced that this SLP is maintainable and that you don't have any alternative remedy. If we are satisfied that the SLP is maintainable, we assure you we are going to ask you some uncomfortable questions." "We will give you some comfortable answers, I hope", replied Senior Advocate Kapil Sibal who appeared for the State of Tamil Nadu.

At the outset, Mr. Sibal argued that the High Court's current decision-making process concerning whether to permit processions is driven by malafide intentions. He expressed concern that contempt proceedings have been initiated against them, leading to their difficulties. When the issue of an intra-court appeal was raised, Mr. Sibal argued that the contempt case should not be determined until an intra-court appeal is filed. In response, the Court suggested that this argument could be raised before the Division Bench.

Subsequently, a counsel representing the State contended that in matters involving public order, it is considered a criminal matter, and therefore, there is no provision for an intra-court appeal.

"We will go by the roster. Was it heard by a Judge hearing criminal matters? If it is heard as a criminal writ, appeal will not lie. But if it is heard as a civil writ, an appeal will lie",

Justice Datta said. "Did the Judge have the authority to deal with Writs on the criminal side", the Court asked. "This is not writ under 482 of CrPC, it is under 226", it added. "We will produce those orders on Monday. If the appeal will not lie, we will be in great difficulty", said Sibal referring to judgments on maintainability of intra-court appeals.

The Special Leave Petition (SLP) also contends that the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) is not a citizen of India, nor a Body Corporate, and thus is not entitled to the Fundamental Rights protected under Article 19 of the Constitution of India, which are specifically granted to Indian citizens. Additionally, the State has argued that in various legal precedents, it has been established that the police authorities have the authority to deny permissions for processions, taking into consideration the prevailing law and order situation and the paramount security concerns of the State.

Regarding the decision to deny permission for the marches, the State argues that taking into account the history of similar marches in various parts of India, including recent incidents in West Bengal and Haryana where such marches resulted in communal clashes, it was prudent to refuse permission.

On October 16, 2023, the Principal Bench issued an order instructing the State to grant permission for the RSS route marches. In its ruling, the Court had characterized the reasons presented by the Advocate General on behalf of the state for denying permission as "weak" and had highlighted that these feeble justifications exposed shortcomings within the State's administrative apparatus. Subsequently, on October 18, 2023, the Madurai Bench granted permission to the RSS to conduct route marches in most Districts, subject to certain conditions.

Case Title: The Director General Of Police v. K.Chandrasekar & Connected Matter

Also Read - SC issues Notice in PIL Contesting Compulsory Death Penalty Clause in SC-ST Act