Sunday, 17, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Velusamy vs State Rep. By
2022 Latest Caselaw 774 Mad

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 774 Mad
Judgement Date : 19 January, 2022

Madras High Court
Velusamy vs State Rep. By on 19 January, 2022
                                                                        Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021


                                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

                                                 DATED : 19.01.2022

                                                      CORAM

                                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

                                             Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021
                                                        &
                                             Crl.MP.No.11832 of 2021


                     1.Velusamy
                     2.K.Nagarathinam
                     3.Anoor Suresh
                     4.Muthukumar
                     5.Eswaramoorthy
                     6.Jegadeeshwaran
                     7.Periyasamy
                     8.Muthuraj
                     9.Senthil @ Senthilnathan
                     10.Mohan @ Mohanraj                                ... Petitioners

                                                        Vs.

                     1.State rep. by
                       The Inspector of Police,
                       Kangayam Police Station,
                       Tiruppur District.
                       Crime No.1118 of 2021

                     2.Ashok Babu                                       ... Respondents




                     1/12



https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
                                                                                 Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021


                     Prayer : Criminal Original Petition has been filed under Section 482 of

                     Criminal Procedure Code to call for the records relating to Crime No.1118 of

                     2021 on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kangayam Police Station,

                     Tiruppur District and quash the same.



                                       For Petitioners   : Mr.M.Guruprasad

                                       For Respondents : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
                                                         Additional Public Prosecutor [For R1]

                                                          ORDER

The petitioner/accused in Crime No.1118 of 2021 for the offence

under Sections 143, 447, 341 and 353 of IP C, filed this quash petition.

2.The defacto complainant, Assistant Executive Engineer, Public

Works Department, Aayakattu Virivakka Ubakottam, Kangayam, Tiruppur

District lodged a complaint on 01.10.2021 stating that on 31.08.2021 at

about 11.30 a.m. in the office of the Public Works Department, Kangeyam,

a meeting was held with the agriculturist in connection with release of water

as per Parambikulam-Aliyar Irrigation Scheme. Though only limited

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

farmers were called for the meeting, more than 100 farmers assembled in

the office for the meeting and they made a demand for the release of water to

be raised from 4.2 feet [113.00 cubic feet/ sec] to 4.5 feet [131.00 cubic

feet/sec]. Further, they made a demand for the days of watering to be

increased from 12 to 14 days, and for the fourth period, from 14 to 15 days.

The officials informed that the possibility of making such arrangement to be

decided after consulting other officials, the present form of release of water

was in force from the year 2000 and suddenly, they cannot have a change.

The farmers failed to agree to the reasoning given by the officials and they

were adamant and forcing the officials of the Public Works Department to

accept their demand. In the process, the Executive Engineer, Assistant

Executive Engineer, Assistant Engineer and other Public Works Department

officials were restrained, made claim that unless their demands are met, they

will not allow PWD officials to move from office, the farmers also conducted

a sit-in-darna, putting up shamiyana near the residential quarters, without

any permission, assembled there and conducted a darna. Hence, a

complaint was lodged.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

3.The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the

petitioners are beneficiaries under Parambikulam-Aliyar Irrigation Scheme.

The entire Parambikulam Aliyar is divided into four zone irrigation pattern,

the first zone of water for wetting was released and completed on

26.08.2021 and as the second zone of water was said to be released on

02.09.2021, the farmers who were benefited through the Scheme were called

through their mobile phone to avoid over crowding for discussion. The

meeting for Vellakoil branch canal discussion was held on 31.08.2021, the

farmers were called informing in their mobile phone. As per the said

scheme, the farmers were about to receive water from two shutters of Aliyar

dam for 7.5 days, of 113.00 cubic feet per second, the same was not

provided, the shutters were also not opened for prescribed number of days

and in view of the same, the tail enders did not receive water. Aggrieved by

the same, the petitioners along with other farmers demonstrated, held

hunger strike on various days requesting release of water in a proper

manner. Nearly 48000 acres of agricultural land depends on Vellakoil

branch canal irrigation and as per the Parambikulam-Aliyar Project

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

[Regulation of Water Supply] Act, the water was released for seven days

and closed from the year 1994 to 2012. Now the Public Works Department

officials instead of releasing water for 14 days, are releasing the water for

three days per month which is inadequate for cultivation of crops. The

petitioners were called individually by the PWD officials to attend the

meeting, which was chaired by the Superintending Engineer, Executive

Engineer, other officials of PWD, the Tahsildar, revenue officials, Deputy

Superintendent of Police and other police officials also participated in the

meeting. Had any such occurrence taken place, no police official, that too,

at the rank of Deputy Superintendent of Police would have kept quite and

they would have acted immediately. The delay in giving the complaint is not

explained. Since the officials got aggrieved by the agriculturist making

demand and also not accepting the officials dictum, they were falsely

implicated in this case.

4.He further submitted that the question of invocation of Section 143

IPC would not occur in this case, since the petitioners and other farmers

were called by the PWD officials in their mobile to attend the meeting. Once

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

they are called for the meeting, it cannot be termed as an unlawful gathering.

Further, the question of trespass also would not arise. The agriculturist

making demand and having heated arguments with the PWD officials would

not amount to wrongful restraint or deterring the public servant in

discharging their duty. The farmers who are beneficiaries of the Scheme had

some grievance, being called for the meeting and on coming to know about

the meeting, came there and made their representation, this cannot be

termed as an offensive, unlawful assembly, thereby restraining and deterring

the public servant from discharging their duty. There is nothing to show

that there was any use of criminal force or any assault on the public servant.

Further, from the Committee resolution passed on 01.09.2021, it could be

seen that the higher officials of PWD, revenue officials and police personnel

were present and in their presence, the petitioners and other agriculturist

signed the agreement. In such circumstances, the complaint which was

lodged one month thereafter is a motivated one with ulterior motive and has

got no relevance. The defacto complainant is none other than one of the

officials of PWD, whose Superior and Senior Officers participated in the

meeting, signed the resolution on 01.09.2021. Further, the peaceful Darna

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

conducted in the residential complex of PWD officials would no way termed

as an unlawful assembly deterring the public servants in discharging their

duties, hence the petitioners cannot be proceeded for the offences alleged in

the FIR.

5.In support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the petitioners

relied upon the judgment of this Court in the case of Jeevanandam and

others vs. State rep. by the Inspector of Police, Karur District and

another reported in 2018 (2) L.W. (Crl.) 606 and the judgment of the Apex

Court in the case of Manik Taneja and another vs. State of Karnataka and

another reported in 2015 (7) SCC 423.

6.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the case in

Crime No.1118 of 2021 for the offence under Sections 143, 447, 341 and

353 IPC came to be registered on the complaint of the Assistant Executive

Engineer, PWD, Aayakattu Virivakka Ubakottam, Kangayam, Tiruppur

District. On 31.08.2021, message was sent to the farmers to attend the

meeting with the PWD officials, they were specifically informed that only

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

representatives should participate in the meeting, on the contrary, more than

100 farmers participated in the meeting, made unlawful demands against the

normal procedure being followed. The farmers were explained that the

demands made by them cannot be suddenly brought into force and the

prevailing practice is followed from the year 2000, the same to be followed

this year too. It is further submitted that for higher demand of water and

modification in the Scheme, it is a consultive process to be had with several

officials and other canal users, after studying the same, for the subsequent

years, their demand would be considered. Failing to understand the same,

the farmers restrained the Public Works Department officials and not

allowed them to move from their place and forced them to accept their

demand. Further, they also put up a shamiyana inside the office complex

and conducted a sit-in Darna, raised slogans against the PWD officials.

Hence, the PWD Engineer lodged a complaint and now the present petition

is filed to quash the same. Hence, he sought for dismissal of this petition.

7.Considering the submissions made and on perusal of the materials

placed on record, it is not in dispute that on 31.08.2021, the PWD officials

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

called the farmers prior to release of irrigation water as per the

Parambikulam-Aliyar Irrigation Scheme. The Vellakoil region is the fourth

and the last region, normally prescribed quantity of water is released for a

prescribed period. The grievance of the petitioners is that they were given

the last priority, due to inadequate release of water the tail end farmers do

not receive sufficient water, they are unable to irrigate the field and hence,

they demanded adequate release of water with proper interval. This was

taken as offensive. Though initially it was rejected, after a sit-in Darna held

outside the Office of the Public Works Department near the residential

quarters in a democratic manner, an agreement was signed by the petitioners

and the PWD officials on 01.09.2021. The PWD Officials in the rank of

Superintending Engineer, Executive Engineer, Assistant Executive Engineer,

Tahsildar, revenue officials, Deputy Superintendent of Police and other

police personnel were present which is recorded in the agreement. This

being the case, complaint was lodged after one month on 01.10.2021, no

reason given for the delay in lodging the complaint. Further, from the

submission and perusal of materials it is seen that the farmers made their

legitimate demand for adequate and proper release of water for their

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

agricultural activities, initially their seems to be some dispute but later the

officials agreed and an agreement was entered. This agreement was entered

in the presence of revenue officials, Deputy Superintendent of Police and

other police personnel. Had there been any unlawful assembly, wrongful

restraint and use of criminal force or assault, it cannot happen in the

presence of Police officials or unnoticed by officials, in this case no police

official or revenue official lodged any complaint immediately. Hence, this

Court finds that the farmers' demand for release of water for irrigation

cannot be termed as an offensive and no case can be proceeded against

them, more so, it is an admitted case that they were called for the meeting,

pursuant to the meeting agreement was signed by the farmers, PWD officials

in the presence of revenue and police officials for release of water, as per

Scheme.

8.Thus, on the above facts of the case this Court finds that no case

made against the petitioners, warranting any investigation and continuation

of investigation would amount to abuse of process of law.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

9.In view of the above, the proceedings Crime No.1118 of 2021

against the petitioners on the file of the Inspector of Police, Kangayam

Police Station, Tiruppur District is hereby quashed. The petition is allowed,

accordingly. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

19.01.2022 Index : Yes/No Internet: Yes/No cse

To

1. The Inspector of Police, Kangayam Police Station, Tiruppur District.

2.The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

M.NIRMAL KUMAR, J.

cse

Crl.O.P.No.21804 of 2021

19.01.2022

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter