The Madras High Court ruled on Friday that no permission shall be granted for any public gathering or march that aims to personally target, defame or intimidate a sitting judge, and directed the Tamil Nadu Police to end immediately any permitted assembly that turns into a personal attack on a judge and to take appropriate legal action. A Division Bench of Chief Justice Sushrut Arvind Dharmadhikari and Justice G. Arul Murugan delivered the judgment while disposing of a public interest litigation filed by R. Karthikeyan, Bar and Bench and Live Law reported.
The Bench drew a clear line between criticising a judgment and attacking the judge who wrote it. Citizens have an undeniable right to disagree with a judgment, the court said, but coordinated actions that use abusive, defamatory or caste-based language to attack a sitting judge do not fall under protected free speech and violate the reasonable restrictions in Article 19(2) of the Constitution. Judicial independence, the court noted, is part of the basic structure of the Constitution.
What the court directed — and what it refused
The court directed the State police and district administrations to keep evaluating every application for a public meeting, march or protest on judicial matters strictly case by case, using their powers under the BNSS and local Police Acts; to deny permission for gatherings aimed at the person of a judge; and to monitor online content so that it does not turn into criminal intimidation of sitting judges. It also directed the police to complete expeditiously the investigation in a case involving an unauthorised protest against a judge.
At the same time, the Bench refused a blanket ban. A blanket order completely banning all public discussions or peaceful gatherings concerning court rulings would go too far and infringe legitimate democratic expression, it said; the State's obligation is to ensure public spaces and digital networks are not used to threaten the safety and integrity of judicial institutions. The verdict had been reserved on October 27.
The protests behind the case
The petition followed protests across Tamil Nadu against a June 25, 2026 judgment of the court's Madurai Bench — Justices G.R. Swaminathan and P.B. Balaji — which struck down a State government order (G.O. (Ms.) No. 31 of March 9, 2024) that had allowed persons from Backward Classes, Most Backward Classes, Denotified Communities and Scheduled Castes who convert to Islam to be treated as Backward Class Muslims; the Bench held a person cannot claim backward class benefits purely by virtue of religious conversion. The petitioner alleged that organisations including the Tamil Nadu Thowheed Jamaath and the Tamil Nadu Muslim Munnetra Kazhagam then held protests at which posters, rallies and social media videos went beyond criticism of the ruling and personally targeted a sitting judge with abusive and caste-based remarks. The court recorded that the police had not been passive: they had refused permission for demonstrations in busy commercial areas and registered cases when groups defied those orders.
Source: Bar and Bench