IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that multiple FIRs for the same incident are not permissible, reinforcing the need for a single, comprehensive investigation.

ORDER :

(G. Jayachandran, J.) :

On 28.02.2022 at about 10.00 a.m., near Thiruvallur Statue, Villupuram Old Bus stand, agitation was organised by AIADMK party condemning the arrest of Mr.D.Jayakumar, Former Minister. In the said agitation, the petitioner and others spoke. Nearly 1500 men and 200 women participated in the agitation.

2. The second respondent, Karthikeyan, the Village Administrative Officer of Villupuram Town, gave a written complaint on the same day i.e 28/02/2022 to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Villupuram West Police Station stating that without obtaining permission from the Police, the agitation condemning the arrest of Mr.D.Jayakumar, was conducted under the leadership of the petitioner C.Ve.Shanmugam. The agitation caused disturbance to the flow of traffic in the Villupuram - Pondicherry National Highways. The general public were put to great hardship. Without following the corona protocol, the agitators gathered between 10.00 am and 12.00 noon facilitating the spread of infectious virus. For the unlawful assembly, wrongful restraint, negligent act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to like, malignant act likely to spread infection of disease dangerous to life and public nuisance complaint in Crime No.51 of 2022 registered for the offences under Sections 143, 341, 269, 270, 290 of IPC, against the agitators led by petitioner Mr.C.Ve.Shanmugam along with 14 office bearers of AIADMK party and 1500 men and 200 women.

3. For the very same incident, on 07/10/2022 (i.e) about 7 months, one Mr.Shanmugha Sundaram, a office bearer of DMK party gave a complaint, alleging that the petitioner herein, a sitting Member of Parliament/Former Minister of Tamil Nadu Government, had delivered speech in the protest meeting, which was in the nature of giving provocation with intent to cause riot and made with intent to provoke breach of peace. Further, it was obscene. This complaint was registered by the very same police in Crime No.194 of 2022 on 07.10.2022 for the offences under Sections 153A, 294(b), 504 and 505(1)(b) of IPC.

4. The petitioner filed Crl.O.P.No.16043 of 2023 to quash the complaint in Crime No:194/2022 given by Shanmuga Sundaram. Crl.O.P.No:16230/2023 to quash the complaint in Crime No.51 of 2022 given by Karthikeyan, Village Administrative Officer.

5. This Court in Crl.O.P.No.16043/2023 vide order dated 20.07.2023 granted stay of filing final report pending disposal of the petition. However, even before the date of the stay order, the Investigating Officer completed the investigation and filed final report before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Villupuram on 15.06.2023. The report was taken on file by the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Villupuram and assigned S.T.C.No.1167 of 2023. Hence, the third petition for quash the final report was filed by the petitioner, which is the subject matter of the Crl.O.P.No.1270 of 2024.

6. Thus, a complaint by the Village Administrative Officer for unlawful assembly without permission during Covid-19 restriction in Crime No:51/2022 for the offences under Sections 143,341,269,270, and 290 of IPC; and a complaint given 8 months later by a private individual by name Shanmuga sundaram who belongs to the ruling party alleging objectional speech by the petitioner C.Ve.Shanmugam registered in Crime No.194 of 2022 under Sections 294(b), 504 and 153A and 505 (1)(b) IPC by the same police (Villupuram West).

7. Later, the complaint of the private person registered in Crime No:194/2022 was investigated and the final report filed before the Judicial Magistrate No.1, Villupuram. The Learned Judicial Magistrate has taken cognizance of the offences and issued summons to the petitioner in S.T.C.No.1167 of 2023.

8. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that for one occurrence, two complaints on two different dates registered by the same police. The first one from the public servant (VAO) and second complaint from the ruling party member by the same police, with differen