Madras High Court
Palanisamy Alias Pongalur ... vs Union Of India Rep.By on 3 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 03.08.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH
Crl.O.P Nos.19588 of 2022 and 4309 of 2023
and Crl.MP.Nos.2739 & 2740 of 2023
Crl.OP.No.19588 of 2022
Palanisamy alias Pongalur Palanisamy ... Petitioner/Accused No.1
.vs.
1.Union of India Rep.by
The Assistant Sub-Inspector
Railway Protection Force
Coimbatore. ..1st Respondent/Complainant
Crime No.293 of 2018
2.D.Chidambaram
Sub-Inspector of Police
Railway Protection Force
Coimbatore District. ..2nd Respondent/de facto Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.740 of 2019, on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.I, Coimbatrore and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.N.R.Elango
Senior Counsel
for Mr.G.R.Deepak
For Respondents : Mr.P.T.Ramkumar
Standing Counsel for R1
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.OP.No.4309 of 2023
1.Rajendiran
2.K.C.V.Thamarai Kannan
3.T.M.Selvaganapathi
4.R.V.Subramani
5.Santha Moorthy
6.S.Rajendiran
7.G.Pandiyan
8.M.S.Raja
9.P.Sakthivel
10.M.Nazar Khan ... Petitioners/Accused 1-9 & 11
vs.
State Rep.by
Sub Inspector
Railway Protection Force
Salem Junction. ..Respondent/Complainant
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, to call for the records in C.C.No.231 of 2019 on the file of the learned
Judicial Magistrate No.I, Salem and quash the same.
For Petitioners : Mr.N.R.Elango
Senior Counsel
for Mr.A.S.Aswin Prasanna
For Respondent : Mr.E.Raj Thilak
Additional Public Prosecutor
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
COMMON O R D E R
These quash petitions have been challenging the proceedings pending before
the Court below for offence u/s.147, 174(a), 145(b) and 146 of the Railway Act,
1989.
2.The case of the prosecution is that all the accused persons belonging to a
political party had trespassed into railway track and had squatted on the track infront
of railway engine. These persons were raising slogans against the Central
Government to safeguard the rights of the State of Tamil Nadu and to constitute
Cavery Management Board.
3.In Crl.OP.No.4309 of 2023, it is stated that there are 11 named accused
persons and 741 unidentified persons belonging to the political party, who had
committed the offence. Insofar as Crl.OP.No.19588 of 2022, is concerned, it is
alleged that nearly 255 persons belonging to a political party including 62 ladies had
committed the offence. Ultimately, the final report has been filed only as against 11
named accused persons in Crl.OP.No.4309 of 2023 and 11 accused persons in
Crl.OP.No.19588 of 2022.
4.Heard Mr.N.R.Elango, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner in both
criminal original petitions, Mr.P.T.Ramkumar, learned Standing Counsel for R1 in
Crl.OP.No.19588 of 2022 and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Government Pleader
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
for respondent in Crl.OP.No.4309 of 2023
5.The issue in hand is clearly covered by the earlier Order passed by this
Court under similar circumstances in Crl.OP.No.10471 of 2022, dated 28.6.2022. For
proper appreciation, the relevant portions in the order are extracted hereunder:
2.The allegations against the petitioners in the final report is
that the petitioners along with others unlawfully assembled and made
protest for constituting Cauvery Management Board as per the judgment
of the Hon-ble Apex Court and suddenly squatted on the centre of the
railway track and obstructed the train. Hence, the 1st respondent
Police has registered a case in Crime No.1343 of 2016, for offence
under Sections 147 and 174(1) of Railways Act, 1989. On completion of
investigation, charge sheet has been filed before the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.I, Thiruvannamalai.
3.Heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the
petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for
the 1st respondent Police.
4.In this case, the charge sheet has been filed against the
petitioners and others for offence under Sections 147 and 174(1) of
Railways Act, 1989. If any person willfully obstructs or prevents any
railway servant in the discharge of his duties, will be punishable under
Section 146 of the Railways Act, 1989. Similarly, Section 174 of the
Railways Act, 1989 deals with obstructing running of train by any
person.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
5.On perusal of the entire charge sheet, it is seen that a group of
500 people assembled and squatted in the centre of the railway track
and made protest demanding to constitute Cauvery Management Board
as per the judgment of the Hon-ble Apex Court. Though they made such
democratic protest, their act will not amount to trespass and obstruct
running train. Further, the final report has been filed merely indicating
that a group of 500 people gathered and made a protest. Except naming
few, their identity has not been established.
6.In such view of the matter, forcing the entire accused to face
the trial, without proper identity, is futile exercise on the part of the
prosecution. The entire allegations made in the charge sheet, even if
taken at face value, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make
out a case against the accused.
6.The above order will squarely cover the facts of the present case. In fact,
this Court had interfered in the criminal prosecution against the persons who had
carried out the protest for the very same cause. The reasoning given in the above
Order will also apply to the present case also.
7. In the light of the above discussion, the continuation of the proceedings as
against the accused persons will result in an abuse of process of Court which
requires the interference of jurisdiction u/s. 482 of Cr.PC. Accordingly, the
proceedings in C.C.No.740 of 2019, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.I,
Coimbatore and C.C.No.231 of 2019, pending on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.I, Salem is quashed in entirety.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
8. Accordingly, both the criminal original petitions stand allowed.
Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
03.08.2023
Index : Yes/No
Speaking Order/Non-Speaking Order
Neutral citation : Yes/No
KP
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
To
1.The Assistant Sub-Inspector
Railway Protection Force
Coimbatore.
2.Judicial Magistrate No.I
Coimbatore
3.Judicial Magistrate No.I
Salem.
4.D.Chidambaram
Sub-Inspector of Police
Railway Protection Force
Coimbatore District.
5.Sub Inspector
Railway Protection Force
Salem Junction.
6.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras,
Madras.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
N. ANAND VENKATESH., J
KP
Crl.O.P Nos.19588 of 2022 and 4309 of 2023
03.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
