Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 15 - September 21, 2025

Citations: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 309 To 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 316 NOMINAL INDEX Sarootham Padmanabhan v. The State of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 309 T Devanathan v. The State, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 310 Suo Motu WP v. The Director General of Tamil Nadu, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 311 P Ayyakannu v. Union of India, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 312 Vanniyakulachathiriyar Nala Arakattalai v. The District Collector and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 313 R Sathish v. The Inspector of Police, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 314 A. Kasthuri v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Others, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 315 Ulpath Nisha v. The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 316 REPORT Resorts Barred In Segur Plateau Elephant Corridor, Land May Be Used Only For Eco-Friendly Purposes: Madras High Court Case Title: Sarootham Padmanabhan v. The State of Tamil Nadu Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 309 The Madras High Court has upheld the findings of a Supreme Court-appointed committee, declaring as null and void the land bought by the resort owners in the Segur plateau, in the Western Ghats area that had been declared as an Elephant corridor. The bench of Justice N Sathish Kumar and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy agreed with most of the findings of the committee except that the land that was purchased subsequent to the declaration of the elephant corridor be handed over to the Government. Long Incarceration Won't Yield Any Benefits: Madras High Court Grants Interim Bail To Financier In Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund Case Case Title: T Devanathan v. The State Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 310 The Madras High Court has granted interim bail to financier Devanathan Yadav till October 30 in the Mylapore Hindu Permanent Fund case wherein he had been accused of swindling funds to the tune of Rs. 619 crores. Justice G Jayachandran noted that keeping the accused in jail for long would not yield any benefits The court thus directed Yadav to be released on interim bail till 30th October and asked him to mobilise a sum of Rs. 100 Crore, to be deposited before the court dealing with cases under the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (TNPID) Act. "Not Good For Persons At Helm Of Affairs To Speak Like This”: Madras HC Closes Suo Motu Case Against Ex-TN Minister Ponmudi For Hate Speech Case Title: Suo Motu WP v. The Director General of Tamil Nadu Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 311 The Madras High Court, on Tuesday, closed the suo motu case initiated against former Tamil Nadu Minister K Ponmudi for his remarks against Vaishnavism, Saivism, and women. The court noted that the complainants were at liberty to approach the concerned jurisdictional magistrates against the closure of complaints. While closing the suo motu case, Justice N Satish Kumar orally remarked that Ponmudi, while holding the public office, should not have made such comments which would hurt the sentiments of persons. "If an ordinary person had uttered this, we could've avoided it. But a person in responsibility should not have uttered this. He should've asked for some advice before making such statements...It's not good for persons at the helm of affairs to speak like this. Everybody has rights under the Constitution. Sentiments should not be hurt like this," the court orally remarked. The court also expressed displeasure in the manner in which the police had closed the complaints and filed their report before the Magistrate's court. The court orally remarked that instead of following their political bosses, the investigating officers should have conducted a proper inquiry. Railway Authorities Can't Deboard Passenger Holding Valid Ticket Merely Because He Is Going For Protest: Madras High Court Case Title: P Ayyakannu v. Union of India Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 312 The Madras High Court recently held that the railway authorities cannot de-board a passenger holding a valid ticket merely because his travel was for conducting a protest. Justice B. Pugalendhi noted that, as per the Railways Act 1989, a person could be de-boarded only in limited circumstances like travelling without a ticket, having an infectious disease, or travelling in unauthorised parts. The court added that if a person with a valid ticket was de-boarded for other reasons, it would amount to an offence for which action could be taken against the officials. 'Equality In Worship Non-Negotiable': Madras High Court Slams Police, Collector For Failing To Prevent Caste Discrimination In Temple Entry Case Title: Vanniyakulachathiriyar Nala Arakattalai v. The District Collector and Others Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 313 The Madras High Court has come down heavily on the District Collector and the Superintendent of Police in Karur District of Tamil Nadu for failing to prevent caste discrimination in two temples there. Justice B. Pugalendhi emphasised that equality for all in temple worship is...

Madras High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 15 - September 21, 2025

Upasana Sajeev

Tags