Madras High Court
A.S.Kannan vs State Of Tamil Nadu on 22 January, 2025
Author: M.Nirmal Kumar
Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1072 of 2025
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED: 22.01.2025
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1072 of 2025
and Crl.M.P(MD).No.722 of 2025
A.S.Kannan : Petitioner
Vs.
1.State of Tamil nadu,
rep., by The Inspector of Police,
Dindigul Town North Police Station,
Dindigul.
Crime No.477 of 2016
2.Gnyanasekaran : Respondents
PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS,
to call for the records pertaining in C.C.No.518 of 2016 for the offences
under Sections 143, 145, 188, 285 and 341 of IPC on the file of the
Judicial Magistrate Court II, Dindigul and quash as illegal.
For Petitioner : Mr.S.Harish
For R1 : Mr.A.Thiruvadikumar
Additional Public Prosecutor
1/5
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.O.P.(MD)No.1072 of 2025
ORDER
The petitioner, who is arrayed as A2 in Crime No.477 of 2016 for
the offences under Sections 143, 145, 341, 188 and 285 of IPC, had filed
this quash petition.
2. The case against the petitioner is that on 06.04.2016 the
petitioner, who is the member of DMK party and 21 others had involved in
unlawful assemble led by A1 against the leader of Marumalarchi Dravida
Munetra Kazhagam, who made controversial remarks against the
petitioner's party President and burned the effigy. Hence, the case was
registered against them.
3. The contention of the petitioner is that showing protest in
democratic society is a fundamental right and there is no public restrained.
The learned learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in support of his
contention had relied upon the judgment reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606
[Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police
Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated 20.09.2018
and in the case of Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police
Station Virudhunagar District and other, in batch of cases in Crl.O.P(MD)
No.7922 of 2019 dated 30.08.2019.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the
defacto complainant, who is the Sub-Inspector of Police, while on patrol
duty found that the petitioner, who is the member of DMK, along with
other accused without any permission hold tharn headed by A1, who is
Dindigul City Secretary, and burned effigy and thereby, caused
disturbance to the public. Hence, case was registered against them in
Crime No.477 of 2016 and after completing investigation, charge sheet
filed and the same was taken on file as CC.No.518 of 2016 before the
learned Judicial Magistrate NO.II, Dindigul, for the offences under
Sections 143, 145, 341, 188 and 285 of IPC.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, this Court is
of the view that showing protest by holding tharna is permissible, which
cannot be construed and projected as illegal act. In this case, case
projected is that the movement of the public was restrained to proceed
further in the direction as they intended and movement of vehicle has been
affected. No pubic had lodged complaint stating about the incident, in
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
such circumstances, claiming that the petitioner holding Dharna and
caused public disturbance would not be proper. Accordingly, the
proceedings in C.C.No.518 of 2016 on the file of the learned Judicial
Magistrate No.II, Dindigul, is hereby quashed against the all accused and
this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected
miscellaneous petition is closed.
22.01.2025
NCC : Yes/No
Index : Yes / No
Internet : Yes / No
Rmk
To
1.The Inspector of Police,
Dindigul Town North Police Station,
Dindigul.
2.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
M.NIRMAL KUMAR,J.
Rmk
22.01.2025
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
