Madras High Court
Unknown vs The State Represented By on 3 January, 2025
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 03.01.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
and
Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.14305 & 14306 of 2024
1.R.V.Chelladurai
2.Paul Durai
3.Chelladurai
4.Chellasamy
5.Narayanan
6.M.Chendrasekar
7.Ramar
8.Neelamegam
9.Kalankaraiyan
10.Gopal
11.Arumugam @ Arumugathammal
12.Masanam
13.Sanmugavel
1/7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
14.Palpandi @ Palpandi Yadav .. Petitioners /
Accused 1 to 14
Vs.
1.The State represented by
The Inspector of Police,
Manur Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(FIR No.178 of 2024) .. Respondent/
Complainant
2.Rabeeba Marium .. Respondent/
Defacto Complainant
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
to call for the records relating to C.C.No.436 of 2024 on the file of the
learned Judicial Magistrate No.V, Tirunelveli and quash the same as
against the petitioners are concerned.
For Petitioners : Mr.M.Karthikeya Venkitachalapathy
For Respondents : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar
Additional Public Prosecutor for R.1
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the
case in C.C.No.436 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate
No.V, Tirunelveli, as against this petitioners.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
2. The petitioners A1 to A14 in C.C.No.436 of 2024 facing trial for
the offences under Sections 147, 143, 283 and 290 of IPC has filed this
quash application.
3. The case against the petitioners is that the defacto complainant /
Sub Inspector of Police on 06.03.2024 at about 10.30 a.m along with
Police party were on patrolling duty. When they were near Alavanthan
Village, Pallikottai Junction bus stand, the petitioners herein along 98
persons had assembled there without any permission raised protest voice
against the Government and obstructed the movement of the vehicle and
public. Hence, the present case has been registered.
4. On conclusion of investigation charge sheet has been filed against
5 witnesses.
5. The contention of the petitioners is that the petitioners who are
local residents were exercising their democratic right to demand proper
supply of water to their village. Earlier they gave a representation from
the Village Administrative Officer to the Collector but no action has been
taken. The villagers are starving for water and hence to highlight their
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
grievance and to show their protest they had assembled on the sides of the
roads near bus stand and raised slogans which have obstructed the
movements of public and public transport.
6. In this case, 5 witnesses were listed. They are all police personals
and no public had lodged complaint and no investigation has been done.
Since the petitioners have raised slogans against the officials for their
inaction and to deter their further protest, the case has been registered.
7. In this case, most of the petitioners are senior citizens and they do
not have any antecedents. Further the learned counsel for the petitioners
submitted that there is no prohibitory orders or no public complaint.
Hence, the petitioners prayed for quashing.
8. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Sub-
Inspector of Police attached to the Police on patrol duty along with team
found that the petitioners and others around 98 persons unlawfully
assembled in front of the public bus stand raised slogans against the
Government and further they also obstructed the movement of public and
the public transport. Despite the Police party asking them to disburse they
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
failed to do so. After giving sufficient warning the case has been
registered. He fairly submitted that it was a demonstration by the villagers
seeking water.
9. Considering the submissions, it is seen that villagers of Manur
had assembled demanding supply of water which is very much essential
for their survival. The entire village had assembled to show their protest
and the in action of the officials. Earlier it is seen that villagers had made
representation from the Village Administrative Officer to the District
Collector, no action has been taken. Showing protest and raising their
voice will not automatically become an unlawful assembly or passing any
deter or creating any public nuisance. Admittedly, in this case no public
had lodged complaint with regard to obstruction of their movement and
vehicle movement.
10. The facts of this case is similar to the facts covered by the
Judgment of this Court reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606 [Jeevanandham
and others vs. The Inspector of Police Velayuthampalayam Police
Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018. Accordingly, the proceedings
in Crime No.458 of 2024 on the file of the respondent police is hereby
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently,
connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
03.01.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
MGA
To
1.The Judicial Magistrate No.V,
Tirunelveli.
2.The Inspector of Police,
Manur Police Station,
Tirunelveli 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.22831 of 2024
M.NIRMAL KUMAR,J.
MGA
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.22831 of 2024
03.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
