Police Must Refuse Permission for Protests Personally Targeting Sitting Judges: Madras High Court (W.P. No. 30622 of 2026)
Court category: High Court
Court / details: High Court of Judicature at Madras
Location: Chennai / Tamil Nadu
In R. Karthikeyan v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P. No. 30622 of 2026), the First Bench of the Madras High Court directed Tamil Nadu Police not to permit assemblies that personally target or intimidate sitting judges and ordered Cyber Crime monitoring of online intimidation.
CASE DETAILS AT A GLANCE
Case Title: R. Karthikeyan v. The Union of India and Others
Court Name: High Court of Judicature at Madras (First Division Bench)
Coram / Judges: Hon'ble Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Hon'ble Mr. Justice G. Arul Murugan
Case Number: W.P. No. 30622 of 2026
Order Date: 30.10.2026
1. Executive Summary
Disposing of a Public Interest Litigation in R. Karthikeyan v. Union of India & Ors. (W.P. No. 30622 of 2026), the First Bench of the Madras High Court drew a clear constitutional line between legitimate criticism of a judicial verdict and coordinated personal attacks against the judge who authored it.
2. Constitutional Balance: Article 19(1)(a) vs. Article 19(2)
The Bench affirmed that citizens have an undeniable right to disagree with or critique a judgment. However, coordinated campaigns employing abusive, defamatory, or caste-based language to intimidate sitting judges fall outside protected speech and attract reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2) of the Constitution, as judicial independence forms part of the Constitution's basic structure.
3. Mandatory Directives Issued to State Police
"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."
- Case-by-Case Evaluation: Police and district authorities must evaluate assembly applications concerning judicial matters under the BNSS and Police Act.
- Cyber Crime Monitoring: The Cyber Crime Division of Tamil Nadu Police was directed to monitor digital platforms and act swiftly if online content crosses into criminal intimidation of sitting judges.
- Expeditious Investigation: Police were directed to complete fair investigations in FIR Nos. 152 and 158 of 2026 at B-5 Southgate Police Station.
Citation: Madras High Court order in W.P. No. 30622 of 2026 dated 30.10.2026. For writ and constitutional advisory, visit https://sklawhouse.com/practice or https://sklawhouse.com/contact-us.
Related City Articles
- Madras High Court Dismisses Review & Closes Contempt After DVAC Registers FIR in Cash-for-Jobs Case
- Magistrate Cannot Conduct Premature Mini-Trial on Civil Title While Deciding Section 175(3) BNSS Plea: Madras High Court (2026:MHC:4155)
- Speedy Eviction Under Tamil Nadu New Tenancy Act: Madras High Court Directs Rent Court to Dispose of RLTOP Within Six Weeks
- Defamatory Search Results: Madras High Court Dismisses Google LLC Review Plea, Upholds 15-Day Obligation to Remove Defamatory URLs Upon Representation
