Madras High Court
T.Arumugamkumar vs The State Represented By on 11 August, 2021
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 11.08.2021
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.11151 of 2021
and
Crl.M.P.(MD) No.5698 of 2021
T.Arumugamkumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
1.The State represented by
Inspector of Police,
South Thamaraikulam Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
Crime No.292 of 2020
2.Justin . .. Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of
Cr.P.C, to call for the records in Crime No.292 of 2020 on the file of the
1st respondent, quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.C.T.Perumal
For R1 : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi
Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side)
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition is filed seeking a direction to
quash the First Information Report in Crime No.292 of 2020 on the file
of the 1st respondent.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
2.Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Additional Public Prosecutor (Crl.Side) for the 1st respondent.
3.The case of the prosecution is that on 06.05.2020, the petitioner
herein was roaming in the road by using his two wheeler bearing
Reg.No.TN 74 AK 8989 at the time of prohibition due to COVID-19
pandemic. Hence, a case in Crime No.292 of 2020 for the offences
punishable under Sections 188 and 269 of IPC has been registered on the
same day. The present petition is filed to quash the First Information
Report in Crime No.292 of 2020.
4.This petition is filed mainly on the ground that Section 188 IPC
is non-cognizable offence and the police has no right to register the case
and investigate. Section 269 IPC is concerned, there is no intention on
the part of the petitioner to spread the disease to another and simply he
was roaming in that area.
5.Heard both sides.
6.In the judgment reported in 2018(2) L.W (Crl.) 606 In
Jeevanandhan and others Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police,
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District and another), it has
been held that the police has no right to file a case under Section 188 IPC
and to investigate the same without getting proper permission from the
concerned jurisdictional Magistrate. Here, there is no material to show
that before registering the case, permission of the concerned
jurisdictional Magistrate has been obtained. In such circumstances, the
respondent has no right to register the case and to investigate the matter.
7.A detailed guideline has been issued by this Court in the
judgment cited supra. On this aspect, Section 188 IPC will not stand
against the petitioner. The offence under Section 269 IPC is concerned,
as per the contents of the First Information Report, it is seen that the
petitioner was simply roaming in the road. It is a trivial matter in which
no offence of grievous nature is involved. Even though Section 144
Cr.P.C order was in force, during the relevant time the respondent police
ought to have warned the petitioner to go in-door, instead of that, they
filed a case. It is also not the case of the respondent that at the time of the
incident, the petitioner was affected by COVID-19. So the contention
that roaming in the road during the pandemic period will spread the
disease is without any basis.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
8.Considering the nature of allegations and the offences involved
in this case and also the fact that because of the pendency of this petition,
the regularization of the petitioner has been affected, since he is working
as Driver in the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation, I am of the
considered view that roaming in the road without any reason should not
be a reason for spoiling the future of the petitioner. Unintended casual act
should not take away the future of the petitioner. Moreover, it is also
brought to the notice of this Court that the Government is also going to
drop all these cases, which have been registered during the pandemic
period against the public. Taking all these aspects into account, I am of
the considered view that the First Information Report in in Crime No.292
of 2020 on the file of the 1st respondent is liable to be quashed and the
same is quashed.
9.In fine, this petition is allowed. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
11.08.2021
Index : Yes/No
Internet : Yes/No
mm
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
Note: In view of the present lock down owing to
COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be
utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of
the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the
responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
South Thamaraikulam Police Station,
Kanyakumari District.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
G.ILANGOVAN. J.
mm
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.11151 of 2021
11.08.2021
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis/
