Point of Law: Section 8 (B) of National Highways Act, 1956 prescribes punishment for mischief by injury to National Highway.

JUDGMENT :

Satyen Vaidya, J.

By way of instant petition, petitioner has prayed for quashing of FIR No. 491 of 2018, dated 15.10.2018, registered at Police Station Sadar, Una, District Una, H.P. under Sections 341, 143 of IPC and Section 8 (B) of the National Highways Act, 1956 and consequent criminal proceedings arising therefrom i.e., Criminal Case No.357 of 2018, titled State of H.P. vs. Pankaj Sahore and others, pending before the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No.1 Una, District Una, H.P.

2. Petitioner has been arrayed as one of the accused in the above noted case registered under Sections 341, 143 of IPC and Section 8 (B) of the National Highways Act, 1956. It is alleged that on 14.10.2018, a large number of people had gathered at Basdehra Chowk on NH-503 and had disrupted the vehicular traffic to protest against the insufficient investigation in relation with the death of one Naresh Kumar alias Sumit residents of Raipur Sahore, Tehsil and District Una, whose body had been recovered two days earlier at village Kotla-Khurd. Similarly, at Bhatoli Chowk also the traffic was disrupted. Even the movement of pedestrian was also not allowed.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that he was never involved in any offence as alleged against him. Even his name did not find mention in the FIR. The investigating agency has not been able to gather any legal evidence against him. It is further submitted that in identical cases of persons with similar accusations in the same case, co-ordinate Benches of this Court have quashed the same FIR qua them vide orders dated 3.11.2022 and 12.10.2022 passed in Cr.MMO No. 970 of 2022 and Cr.MMO No. 656 of 2022, respectively.

4. Despite opportunities, respondents have not filed any reply.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the records of the case carefully.

6. Noticeably, petitioner has been arrayed as an accused in criminal proceeding arising out of FIR No. 491 of 2018, under Sections 341, 143 of IPC and Section 8 (B) of the National Highways Act.

7. The first allegation against petitioner is that he was a member of an unlawful assembly.

8. Unlawful assembly is defined in Section 141 of IPC. To be a member of an unlawful assembly, a person should have common object to commit an offence or any unlawful act as detailed in Section 141 of IPC. Section 142 of IPC further requires that a person accused of being a member of unlawful assembly should be aware of facts, which renders the assembly as unlawful and should have intentionally joined that assembly, or continued in it as such.

9. In the case in hand, there is no material to suggest that petitioner was a member of any unlawful assembly. Neither the requisite knowledge nor intention necessary to constitute the offence of being member of unlawful assembly are suggested against the petitioner.

10. Similarly, no material has been shown against the petitioner to attract the mischief of Section 341 of IPC. No evidence has been shown to exist against petitioner to suggest that petitioner had wrongfully restrained any person proceeding in any direction.

11. Section 8 (B) of the National Highways Act, 1956 prescribes punishment for mischief by injury to National Highway. There is no allegation of mischief against the petitioner. There also is no material on record to suggest that the petitioner was involved in any act of omission or commission, which made the National Highway impassable or less safe for travelling or conveying property.

12. The allegations are that a large number of people had gathered on National Highway to protest against the insufficiency of investigation in respect of the death of a local resident. Even if petitioner was present on spot, he cannot be said to have committed any of the alleged offences, unless the requisite intent or knowledge to commit such offences is made out against him. The respondents have not filed any reply nor have they placed on record any materi