Madras High Court
Niruban vs The State Represented By on 24 March, 2022
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 24.03.2022
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
and Crl.M.P.Nos.3747 & 3749 of 2022
1. Niruban
2. Easakimuthu
3. Chandru
4. Prabhakaran
5. Vignesh
6. Zohaibmiyahith
7. Sureka
8. Hemalatha
9. Subash Chandra Boss
10. Ananth
11. Sathishkumar
12. Rajendraprasath
13. Sankaraya
14. Bharathi
15. Sathishkumar
16. Akash
17. Surjith
18. Adiya @ Adhitya ... Petitioners
Vs.
1. The State represented by,
Sub-Inspector of Police,
V-5, Thirumangalam Police Station,
Chennai – 101.
2. C.Lawrance Mani ... Respondents
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
1/6
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
PRAYER : The Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Criminal
Procedure Code, pleased to call for records in C.C.No.6394 of 2018 on the file
of the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate Court, at Egmore and to quash the
same.
For Petitioners : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy
For R1 : Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan
Additional Public Prosecutor.
ORDER
The Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for records in
C.C.No.6394 of 2018 on the file of the learned XIII Metropolitan Magistrate
Court, Egmore and to quash the same.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners and other accused
belong to the organization of Student Federation of India (SFI) had assembled at
the entrance of CBSE South Zone Head Office in Anna Nagar west on
07.05.2018 and protested in an unlawful manner against the allocation of exam
centre for the Tamil Nadu students in other states for NEET exam and raised
slogans against the Central Government and thereby, caused disturbance to the
general public. Hence, a case in Crime No.218 of 2018 was registered against
the petitioners for the offences under Sections 143, 353 and 188 of IPC on the
same day.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
3. 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.
4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the
learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent and perused
the materials available on record.
5. In the judgment reported in 2018(2) L.W (Crl.)606 (In
Jeevanandhan and others Vs. State rep. by Inspector of Police,
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.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
6. 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
petitioners. The offence under Sections 143 and 353 IPC are concerned, as per
the contents of the First Information Report, it is seen that the petitioners
protested in an unlawful manner and no act of violence or untoward incident is
reported. It is a trivial matter in which no offence of grievous nature is involved.
Section 143 IPC is concerned, it specifies the period of punishment for a person
who is a member of an unlawful assembly.
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.
8. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that no useful
purpose will be served in continuing the proceedings in respect of all the other
accused also.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
9. Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the
proceedings in C.C.No.6394 of 2018 on the file of the learned XIII
Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore in respect of all the accused is quashed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
24.03.2022
Index :Yes/No
Internet:Yes/No
ham/rgi
To
1. The Sub-Inspector of Police,
V-5, Thirumangalam Police Station,
Chennai – 101.
2. The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA.,J
ham/rgi
Crl.O.P.No.6595 of 2022
and
Crl.M.P.Nos.3747 & 3749 of 2022
24.03.2022
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
