Law and order can’t be used as fig leaf to defy court orders: Madras high court

MADURAI: Slamming the Tamil Nadu govt for using ‘law and order as a fig leaf’ to not implement judicial orders, Madras high court said the attitude was unacceptable and inexcusable.

During contempt of court proceedings related to his orders on lighting of ‘Karthigai deepam’ atop the Thiruparankundram hills in Madurai district, Justice G R Swaminathan said: “I am tired. In how many cases, am I to haul up the officers concerned for contempt? Even today, the chief secretary who was reading out from a prepared text stated that even though they have high regard for the judiciary, they have to take into account law and order issues while implementing the court’s orders. This is unacceptable.”




When a court has issued an order, unless it has been stayed or set aside by a higher forum, it has to be obeyed, he said, adding: “Of course, there could be cases where a judicial order cannot be implemented. The court can conceive of such situations. But law and order cannot be a ground for flouting a court’s order. That would be inexcusable. That would amount to breakdown of law and order. That would lead to paralysis of the constitutional machinery.”

Referring to another order passed by him, staying construction of a church in Alamarathupatti village in Dindigul district, Justice Swaminathan said though an injunction had been granted by the court, the construction continued to proceed. A contempt petition was also moved. The tahsildar had submitted a report that implementation of the injunction order is meeting with resistance on the ground and, therefore, because of law and order issues, they are unable to enforce the court’s order.

“The place is being used for congregation worship. That is why the court directed the local authorities to take immediate action. But the authorities appear to be afraid to even touch the building. One has to draw an adverse conclusion as to why the authorities are hesitant. Law and order appears to be a convenient fig leaf,” said Justice Swaminathan.

As for the Thiruparankundram case, the judge observed that the chief secretary had been called upon to clarify as to whether the collectors of Madurai and Dindigul passed prohibitory orders under Section 163 of BNSS, 2023, on their own or on instructions. He said, “the court expects the chief secretary to take a responsible stand even while answering the question.”



As per his earlier direction, Tamil Nadu chief secretary N Muruganandam and additional director-general of police (L&O) S Davidson Devasirvatham appeared before the court through video-conferencing. Madurai collector K J Praveen Kumar and Madurai city commissioner of police J Loganathan were present in person.



Adjourning the case to Jan 9, 2026, the judge did not dispense with the further appearance of these officers.