HC prods police to act against pro, anti-CAA stir sans nod in

Amid continuing agitations against the CAA at several places in Tamil Nadu, the Madras High Court on Thursday said none had a right to protest in a place of their choice without permission, saying such a course might lead to a 'dangerous consequence'.

It made the observations while directing the police to act against an agitation staged on a public road opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act in the hosiery city of Tirupur in Western Tamil Nadu and to ensure that no more protests both for and against the controversial law took place there without due permission.

Noting that there was a subtle difference between the right to protest and causing hindrance by obstructing a public road, a division bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Krishan Ramasamy said the approach of the authorities in not taking action after filing FIRs cannot be allowed.

"Nobody has the right to indulge in such agitation in a place chosen by them. This might lead to a dangerous consequence, the court said hearing a plea from a Tirupur resident against the demonstrations.

The bench directed the Tirupur police to ensure that no more agitations both for and against the CAA took place without due permission.

After hearing the Government Pleader, the bench said the location in which agitation was on at Tirupur is a public road that school children use for commuting. Besides there was a hospital and and thus the protest will cause hindrance to the general public.

"In such view of the matter we are inclined to direct the authorities to see it that no more agitations both for and against CAA takes place in the aforesaid place without due permission," the bench said in its order.

Referring to the CAA, the petitoner submitted that several Muslim outfits have been staging agitations across the state seeking withdrawal of the law and the agitation in Tirupur had been on from February 15 near a cross road where schools and cinema theaters are also located.

Apprehending that the demonstrations would be detrimental to the peace and harmony, the petitioner sought a direction to the authorities not to entertain them.

When the matter came up, the Government Pleader submitted that so far 20 cases have been registered in this connection in Tirupur and the chargesheets have been filed against those who involved in protests for and against the CAA.

When the bench asked the Government Pleader whether the agitation was still going on, he replied in the affirmative.

Recording the same, the bench said, "We are of the view that the approach of the authorities cannot be countenanced.

If the FIR is filed followed by the final report nothing prevents the authorities from taking action and to see to it that no such protests take place without any permission or authorisation."