SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(Mad) 3434

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
G.K. ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.
K.K.S.S.R. Ramachandran, Virudhunagar - Appellant
Versus
The State rep by The Inspector of Police, Virudhunagar & Another - Respondent
CRL.O.P(MD) No. 16559 of 2022 & Crl.M.P(MD). No. 11044 of 2022
Decided On : 15-09-2022

Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner:S. Agilesh Kumar, G. Mariappan, Advocates. For the Respondents: R1, E. Raj Thilak, Additional Public Prosecutor.

The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power under Section 482 can be used to quash proceedings if the allegations in the FIR do not prima facie constitute any offence, as outlined in the case law State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others.

Headnote:

Quash Petition - Criminal Agitation - Sections 143, 341, 283 of IPC - The court discussed the power under Section 482, the definition of Unlawful Assembly, and the criteria for quashing proceedings based on the allegations in the First Information Report. The court referred to the case law State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others to emphasize the circumstances under which directing the parties to undergo trial would be a futile exercise and infringe the rights of the accused.

Fact of the Case:

The petition was filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.658 of 2019, which alleged offences under Sections 143, 341, 283 of IPC related to a protest against the National Citizenship Act conducted by the DMK Political Party.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the allegations in the First Information Report did not satisfy the requirements of Sections 143, 341, 283 of IPC, and therefore, the FIR could not be sustained and was liable to be quashed.

Issues: The main issue was whether the allegations in the FIR constituted offences under Sections 143, 341, 283 of IPC and justified the continuation of the proceedings.

Ratio Decidendi: The court applied the principles outlined in the case law State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others to determine that the allegations did not prima facie constitute any offence and therefore, the proceedings should be quashed.

Final Decision: The proceedings in Crime No.658 of 2019 were quashed, and the Criminal Original Petition was allowed.

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, to call for the records relating to the proceedings of First Information Report in Crime No.658 of 2019 pending on the file of the 1st respondent police and quash the same in respect of petitioners/A1 herein.)

1. This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.658 of 2019 on the file of the first respondent, thereby having been taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 143, 341 and 283 of IPC as against the petitioners.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 17.12.2019, around 11.15 a.m, the petitioner along with other accused involved protest democratic agitation conducted by DMK Political Party to oppose the National Citizenship Act, without getting prior permission from the concerned authority. On the basis of the above said allegation, the respondent police registered the complaint and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner and others for the offences under Sections 143, 341 and 283 of IPC in Crime No.658 of 2019, on the file of the first respondent.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is innocent person and he has not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Without any base, the first respondent police registered a case in No.658 of 2019 for the offences under Sections 143, 341 and 283, as against the petitioners. Hence he prayed to quash the same.

4. Per contra, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the petitioner along with other accused involved protest for the democratic agitation conducted by DMK Political Party to oppose the National Citizenship Act and there are specific allegations as against the petitioner to proceed with the trial. Therefore, he vehemently opposed the quash petition and prayed for dismissal of the same.

5. Heard Mr.S.Agilesh Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr.E.Raj Thilak, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the first respondent.

6. On perusal of the charge, it is seen that the petitioner and along with other accused involved protest for the democratic agitation conducted by DMK Political Party to oppose the National Citizenship without getting prior permission from the concerned authority. Therefore, the respondent police levelled the charges under Sections 143, 341 and 283 of I.P.C. as against the petitioner and others.

7. It is to be noted that while exercising the power under Section 482, the Court should be slow, at the same time, if the Court finds that from the entire materials collected by the prosecution taken as a whole, would not constitute any offence, in such situation, directing the parties to undergo ordeal of trial will be a futile exercise and it will infringe the right of the persons and in this regard, the Apex Court in State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others reported in 1992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335, has been held as follows :

“........

(a) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused;

(b) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;

(c) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or -complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused;

(d) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non~cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as cont

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top