The Madras High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice N Satish Kumar quashed criminal proceedings against 11 law students accused of raising slogans against the Srilankan Government, demanding their "Tamil Ealam issues". The bench observed that the students had democratically raised protest against the inaction of the police and such a gathering could not be held unlawful. (Aravinth and others v. State)
The court observed, "At any event, mere gathering of more than 5 persons will not amount to any offence, unless the action of such persons fit into any of the provision found in Section 141 to constitute such assembly as unlawful assembly. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that continuation of prosecution is nothing but an abuse of process of law."
Facts of the caseAA
The crux of the case of the prosecution is that the petitioners who are studying in a Law College along with their friends without obtaining permission have gathered opposite to Chennai Ambedkar Government Law College and raised a slogan against "Srilankan Government, demanding their Tamil Ealam issues" and blocked the road besides they have also wrongfully restrained movement of the public and thereby committed the offence under aforesaid sections.
This Criminal Original Petition was filed to call for the records relating to the case filed for the offence under Sections 143, 145 r/w 149 of IPC and Sec.7(1) (a) Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 and 41 Cp Act 1988 on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate Court No.VII, George Town, Chennai and to quash the same.
Contention of the Parties
The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners have gathered and raised slogans against Srilankan Government, demanding their Tamil Ealam Issues and they have also sought justification in International Court against the President of the neighbouring country. Except in the present case no other allegation was made against these petitioners and they made such protest in a democratic way and even when the entire prosecution case was taken as a face value, the same would not constitute any offence and continuing the prosecution is nothing but abuse of process of law. Therefore, submitted that the same may be quashed.
The learned Government Advocate [Criminal Side] submitted that the accused illegally assembled and caused disruption to the public, thereby they have been prosecuted.
He further submitted while exercising the power under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., the Court should be slow, at the same time, if the Court finds that from the entire materials collected by the prosecution taken as a whole, would not constitute any offence, in such situation, directing the parties to undergo ordeal of trial will be a futile exercise and it will infringe the right of the persons and in this regard, the Apex Court in State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others reported in 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335.
Courts Observation and order
The bench observed, "Only when the assembly fit into any of the above circumstances, it could be construed as unlawful. The materials collected by the prosecution do not show that the accused had shown any criminal force to commit any mischief, crime or any offence or by way of criminal force or tried to take possession of the property or right to use of incorporeal right which is in possession of enjoyment of others or rights.
In this case also, the petitioners have not unlawfully assembled to commit any offence. Of course, they have democratically raised protest for the inaction on the part of the police for not taking action and such gathering cannot be said to be unlawful assembly. At any event, mere gathering of more than 5 persons will not amount to any offence, unless the action of such persons fit into any of the provision found in Section 141 to constitute such assembly as unlawful assembly. In such view of the matter, this Court is of the view that continuation of prosecution is nothing but an abuse of process of law."
Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition was allowed and the final report filed against the petitioners pending on the file of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate No.VII, George Town, Chennai in the case was quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions were closed.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws:
Share this Document :Picture Source :
