The Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court today warned that contempt charges would be framed on February 2 against senior Tamil Nadu officials unless they show "proper cause" for failing to implement its earlier orders in the long-running Thirupparankundram hilltop dispute.
Justice GR Swaminathan, hearing contempt petitions linked to the court's December 1 order permitting the lighting of the Karthigai Deepam by the petitioner on the hilltop pillar, recorded that despite repeated opportunities, authorities had not satisfactorily explained the non-compliance.
"Unless proper cause is shown, charges will be framed against the contemnors on 02.02.2026," the judge said, making it clear that the court was not inclined to indefinitely wait for explanations.
The Madurai District Collector KJ Praveenkumar, City Police Commissioner J Loganathan, Deputy Commissioner of Police (South) AG Inigo Divyan, and Assistant Commissioner S Sasipriya appeared in person before the court. DGP Davidson Devasirvatham who were then the DGP appeared through video conferencing. Temple Executive Officer Yagna Narayanan was also present.
The court recalled that after its December 1 order allowing the Deepam, the Collector had issued a prohibitory order under Section 163 of the BNSS, which was later quashed by the court. Even thereafter, the implementation was allegedly obstructed by the police.
"To frustrate the judicial order, a prohibitory order was passed. Even after it was quashed, the implementation of this Court's order was obstructed," Justice Swaminathan ruled in the order.
The judge also raised pointed questions on how the police allowed the dargah authorities to hoist a flag on a tree located in what the Division Bench has since declared as temple land during the Sandhanakoodu festival.
The temple's Executive Officer told the court that no permission was obtained by the dargah authorities and described the act as an "unauthorised trespass." He assured the court that a formal complaint would be lodged with the police.
"What was committed amounts to rank criminal trespass," the judge recorded the words of the temple official, noting his undertaking to initiate criminal proceedings.
The District Collector and the Deputy Commissioner of Police told the court that they had acted on their own and not on any dictation. The State, through the Additional Advocate General, sought more time, stating that appeals against the contempt proceedings were pending.
Granting time, the court adjourned the matter to February 2, making it clear that failure to justify the actions would result in contempt charges being formally framed.
