Madras High Court
Muthupandi vs The Sub Inspector Of Police on 25 March, 2025
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.4153 of 2024
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
DATED :25.03.2025
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.DHANABAL
CRL. OP(MD). No.4153 of 2024
Muthupandi ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. The Sub Inspector of Police
Keelarajakularaman Police Station
Virudhunagar District
2. Muthukumar
Sub Inspector of Police
Keelarajakularaman Police Station
Virudhunagar District ... Respondents
PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS to call
for the records in the case in STC No. 4818 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial
Magistrate Court, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District and quash the same as
illegal
For Petitioner : Mr.M.Jothi Basu
For Respondents : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar
Government Advocate (Crl. Side)
_____________
Page No. 1 of 8
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
Crl.O.P.(MD) No.4153 of 2024
ORDER
This petition has filed to quash the proceedings in STC No. 4818 of
2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar
District.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with others
without any permission formed unlawful assembly and made protest against
the Central Government for the hike in diesel and petrol price on 10.09.2018 at
about 10.45 to 10.50 am., and blocked the road, thereby committed the offence
under Sections 341 and 143 of IPC.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that
based on the complaint given by the second respondent the first respondent
registered a case in Crime No. 295 of 2018 for the offences under Sections 143
and 341 of IPC. The petitioner is the political party of CPIM and on 10.09.2018
at about 10.45 hrs they conducted demonstration for various demands including
hike in petrol and diesel price in front of Chathrapatti Bus stop, Rajapalayam,
Alangulam Main Road. Infact all the witnesses are police witnesses and there
is no unlawful assembly and therefore the accused persons cannot be
prosecuted under Section 143 of IPC. There is no evidence that the petitioner
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
and others have wrongfully restrained some body to attract the offence under
Section 341 of IPC. The first respondent without conducting proper
investigation filed final report before the learned Judicial Magistrate,
Rajapalayam and the learned Magistrate also without any prima facie materials
have taken cognizance and the same is pending in STC No. 4814 of 2019 and
therefore the pending proceedings is liable to be quashed.
4. The learned counsel appearing for the first respondent would submit
that this petitioner along with others have formed unlawful assembly by
restraining others from proceeding in the Rajapalayam, Alangulam Main Road.
Therefore the second respondent lodged a complaint against the petitioner and
others and the first respondent registered a case and thereafter the first
respondent conducted investigation and filed final report and the trial Court has
also taken cognizance and there are prima facie materials available as against
this petitioner to proceed with the case, therefore he has to face the trial, hence
the petition is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard both sides and perused the materials available on record.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
6. In this case the first respondent has registered a case against the
petitioner and others for the offences under Section 143 and 341 of IPC
alleging that petitioner along with others formed unlawful assembly restrained
the public from proceeding in the road by conducting demonstration of protest
against the central government for hike in petrol and diesel price. Therefore the
second respondent lodged complaint and the first respondent registered a case
against the petitioner and other under Section 143 and 341 of IPC.
7. On careful perusal of the entire records, there are no materials to show
that the petitioner and other accused formed unlawful assembly. They only
conducted demonstration and no any unlawful assembly as defined under
Section 141 of IPC. There are no materials to constitute the offence under
Section 143 of IPC, as per the First Information Report and final report. Merely
because they assembled together and conducted dharna it will not amount to
unlawful assembly to attract the provision under Section 143 of IPC.
8. So far as offence under Section 341 of IPC is concerned, there are no
materials that this petitioner along with other accused unlawfully restrained
anybody and there is no any complaint given by any one of the public and no
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
other materials to show that the accused person obstructed anybody in
proceeding in the public road, therefore the pending proceedings are liable to
be quashed.
9. At this juncture, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner relied
on the following judgments:
a) Jeevanantham and others .vs. The Inspector of Police,Velayuthapuram
Police Station, Karur District and another reported in 2018-22 L.W.(Crl.)606
b) K.Sathaiya and others .vs. The Inspector of Police, Arimalam Police
Station, Pudukottai District in Crl.O.P(MD) No.75 of 2025.
10. On careful perusal of the above said judgments it is clear that when
the assembly of persons were expressing dissatisfaction on the governance and
claiming for minimum rights that are guaranteed to an ordinary citizen and if
such an assembly of persons are to be trifled by registering an FIR under
Section 143 of IPC and now equivalent to Section 189(2) of BNS and filing a
Final Report for the very same offence, no democratic dissent can ever be
shown by the citizens and such prohibition will amount to violation of
fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
11. In the case on hand also the petitioners agitated for hike of petrol and
diesel price in a peaceful manner and no any complaint lodged by any public
and no any public movement was curtailed. To attract the offence under
Section 143 and 341 of IPC there is no any material that this petitioner along
with other accused formed unlawful assembly with a common intention to resist
the execution of any law or of any legal progress. Further the said dharna did
not cause any public nuisance to anybody. More over there is no unlawful
assembly to do the illegal act with common intention. In view of the above
discussions, this Court is of the opinion that the pending First Information
Report is liable to be quashed.
12. Accordingly the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the
proceedings in STC No. 4818 of 2019 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate
Court, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District is hereby quashed.
25.03.2025
Internet :Yes
Index :Yes/No
NCC :Yes/No
aav
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
To
1. The Judicial Magistrate Court, Rajapalayam, Virudhunagar District.
2. The Sub Inspector of Police
Keelarajakularaman Police Station
Virudhunagar District
3.The Additional Public Prosecutor,
Madurai Bench of Madras High Court,
Madurai.
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
P.DHANABAL, J.
aav
25.03.2025
_____________
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis ( Uploaded on: 04/04/2025 04:05:23 pm )
