Back
2022 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 38316
HIGH COURT OF MADRAS
G.K. Ilanthiraiyan, J
Siyabudheen – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Crl.O.P.No.29104 of 2022|Crl.M.P.Nos.17837 of 2022|Crl.M.P.Nos.17838 of 2022
For the Appellants/Petitioners: I. Abdul Basith
For the Respondents: S. Santhosh
Criminal prosecution under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959, can only be initiated by the owner, occupier, or manager of the property, not by the police acting independently.
Headnote:The petitioner sought to quash proceedings under the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959, specifically regarding the unauthorized hanging of an advertisement board for a political demonstration. The court examined the statutory requirements for initiating prosecution under Section 4 of the Act. The primary issue was whether the respondent police were the competent authority to lodge a complaint under Section 4 of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959. The court observed that the Act requires the lack of written consent from the owner, occupier, or person in management of the property, and found that the respondent did not fit these descriptions. In view of the above, the proceedings in S.T.C.No.703 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gudalur, is hereby quashed. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. procedural history and factual background of the unauthorized advertisement charge. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. requirement of being the owner, occupier, or manager to initiate prosecution under the disfigurement act. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. quashing of proceedings due to lack of competence of the complainant. (Para 6) |
ORDER
This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.No.703 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gudalur, Nilgiris District having been taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 4A(1a) and 4B of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959.
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 05.12.2020 at about 06.00 p.m, when the respondent Police were on patrol duty near Sembala Patti Shop, the petitioner tied and hanged an advertisement board in the iron pipe for declaring protest with the content "On December 6th SDPI party nilgiris district conducting a huge demonstration near old bus stand at evening 4.30 p.m". Hence, the respondent registered an FIR in Crime No.1122 of 2020 for the offences under Sections 4A(1a) and 4B of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959. After completion of investigation the respondent filed a final report and the same has been taken cognizance by the Trial Court.
3. Heard both sides.
4. A perusal of records revealed that the respondent is not a competent person to lodge a complaint under Sections 4A(1a) and 4B of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959. It is relevant to extract the provisions of Section 4 of Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959
" 4. Penalty for unauthorised disfigurement by advertisements:-
Whoever affixes to, or inscribes or exhibits on, any place open to public view any advertisement without the written consent of the owner or occupier or person in management of the property in which such place is situated shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three months or with fine which may extend to two hundred rupees, or with both".
5. Admittedly, the respondent is neither the owner or the occupier or the person in management of the alleged property nor the competent person to initiate criminal prosecution. Further, the entire complaint is vague since the respondent failed to satisfy about the place of occurrence and no specific allegations are as against the petitioner. That apart, there was no seizure of the poster. Without any materials, the respondent mechanically filed a final report. Therefore, the final report filed by the respondent cannot be sustained as against the petitioner.
6. In view of the above, the proceedings in S.T.C.No.703 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate, Gudalur, is hereby quashed. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
