Madras High Court
Abdul Rauf vs The State Represented By on 7 March, 2022
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 07.03.2022
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
1.Abdul Rauf
2.Noor Mohamed ... Petitioners/Accused (A1, A8)
Vs.
The State represented by,
The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Mangalampet Police Station,
Cuddalore – 606 104.
(In Crime No.195 of 2021) ... Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: This Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C.,
to call for the records in Crime No.195 of 2021 on the file of the respondent
police and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.A.Rajamohamed
For Respondent : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
Additional Public Prosecutor
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings
in Crime No.195 of 2021, dated 10.06.2021, on the file of the respondent/
Mangalampet Police Station, Cuddalore District, for the offences under
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
Sections 143 & 188 of IPC, Section 3 of Epidemic Diseases Act, 1897 and
Section 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act 2005.
2.The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners along with some
other accused in violation of promulgation order issued under Section 144 of
Cr.P.C, assembled and participated in the protest against the increase in the
price of Gas, Petrol and Diesel without any prior permission from the
concerned authorities, when the respondent police had warned that they were
illegally conducting the protest, the accused have dispersed from the place.
Based on the complaint of the respondent a case in Crime No.195 of 2021,
dated 10.06.2021 was registered against the petitioners and the other accused,
for the offence as stated above.
3.The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that the
petitioners are social activists and have been raising voice for the public cause
and public welfare, whenever there seems injustice and inaction of the
Government machineries. The petitioners are the citizens of this Country and
they have right to freely assemble and also right to freely express one's view or
constitutionally protected rights under Part III and their enjoyment can be
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
curtailed only in proportional manner through a fair and non-arbitrary
procedure provided under Article 19 of the Constitution of India. It is the duty
of the Government to protect the rights of freedom of speech and assemble that
is essential to a democracy. Even, as per the FIR, there was no violation or
untoward incident and it is the case of the prosecution that when warned the
petitioners have dispersed from the place. The petitioner does not have any
intention to spread any decease and there is no material to show that the
petitioners have committed any such offence. Further for the offence under
Section 3 of the Epidemic Diseases Act, 1887, is concerned, it can be invoked
only when Section 188 of IPC is applicable. He would further submit that the
Hon'ble Madurai Bench of this Court in Crl.O.P.No.12448 of 2020, in the case
of Henri Tiphagne Vs. The Sub-Inspector of Police and Another, in similar
facts finding that no untoward incident or any act of violence had happened,
had quashed the proceedings. He would further submit that the Government
has also directed to withdraw of cases registered during the pandemic period.
Further, the petitioner is also similarly placed as that of the petitioner in the
above mentioned Judgment and hence, the said judgment squarely applicable to
the facts of the present case, he prayed to quash the proceedings.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
4.The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the
petitioners, in violation of the orders passed under Section 144 of the Cr.P.C
assembled unlawfully and raised slogans against the increase of price of fuel
without getting any permission and when they were warned they left the scene
of occurrence. However, he would submit that there was no Act of violence or
untoward incident.
5.Heard the learned counsel on either side and perused the materials
placed on records.
6.In this case the allegation against the petitioners along some other
accused is that they have unlawfully assembled in violation of restrictions
imposed under Section 144 of Cr.P.C., and raised slogans and when the
respondent police had warned them, the have dispersed from the place. In
Crl.O.P.No.12448 of 2020, dated 05.11.2020, in the case of Henri Tiphagne
Vs. The Sub-Inspector of Police and Another the Hon'ble Madurai Bench of
this Court has held as follows:
“Though, there are prima facie materials to justify
the registration of the First Information Report, I am of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
view that its continuance is not warranted. This is because
no untoward incident had taken place. The country had
witnessed protests all over by different sections of people
against the said amendments. Since the protest was
peaceful and even the First Information Report does not
disclose any act of violence or happening of untoward
incident, I am of the view that the continued prosecution is
not warranted. Quashing the same will secure the ends of
justice.”
7.Considering the nature of allegations and the offences involved in this
case, this Court is of the opinion that protesting for the welfare of the public
should not be held to be a reason for spoiling the future of the petitioners.
Unintended casual act, without any act of violence, should not take away the
future of the petitioners. Moreover, it is also brought to the notice of this Court
that the Government is also going to drop all cases, which have been registered
during the covid pandemic period against the public. Taking all these aspects
into account, this Court is of the considered view that FIR in Crime No.195 of
2021 on the file of the respondent police is liable to be quashed and that no
useful purpose will be served by keeping the proceedings pending in respect of
all the other accused also.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA, J.
Dua
8.Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the
proceedings in Crime No.195 of 2021, dated 10.06.2021, on the file of the
respondent/Mangalampet Town Police Station, Cuddalore District, are hereby
quashed in respect of the petitioners as well as the other accused also.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition stands closed.
07.03.2022
Internet : Yes/No
Dua/Gd
To
1.The Sub-Inspector of Police,
Mangalampet Police Station,
Cuddalore – 606 104.
2.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court, Madras.
Crl.O.P.No.5041 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.No.2692 of 2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
