COMMON ORDER

The Criminal Original Petitions are filed for enlarging the petitioner on bail in the event of their arrest pending investigation in Crime.No.483 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioners are the accused in Crime No.483 of 2022 for the offences under Sections 143, 294(b), 341, 353, 506 (ii) of IPC and Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992.

3. The case of the prosecution is that on 19.12.2022, when the District Council Vice President Election was conducted at District Collector Office, Karur, the defacto complainant and his assistant S.Nirmal Ganesh were on duty to oversee the election. At about 2.30 pm, AIADMK's District Secretary and former Tamil Nadu Minister Mr.Vijayabaskar and about 200 persons, in which 58 of them are named and others not named, formed an unlawful assembly and made slogans against the DMK party and tried to forcefully enter into the polling area. When the Police officials manning the bandobust duty told them to allow only persons, who are authorised to enter, they used filthy language against the DMK party and others. They have blocked the Karur-Dindugal main road and prevented the free flow of the traffic. When the police tried to arrest them, they started hitting against the barricade and threatened them that they would take action against them, if they come to power and made a death threat.

4. On the basis of these aforesaid allegations, the First Information Report was registered.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that one Thiruvika, member of AIADMK party filed W.P.(MD).No.26246 of 2022, seeking direction to the respondent police to forthwith issue notification for the conduct of the Karur District Panchayat Vice Chairman Election and conduct the election under supervision of retired Hon'ble High court Judge or by any other retired District Court Judge with adequate police protection and further direction to the respondents to videograph the entire election process so as to ensure free and fair election without any irregularities.

6. However, instead of providing police protection, at the instigation of ruling party, they restrained the members of AIADMK political party to cast their vote in the election. Therefore, there were some fight between the members of both the political parties. Thereafter, this case is foisted against the AIADMK party. He further submitted that there was no assault made and no damages whatsoever, alleged to have been caused to any public or private property. Thus, he prayed for Anticipatory Bail to the petitioners.

7. In response, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side) opposed these petitions, strongly on the ground that the petitioners who belonged to AIADMK party indulged in an illegal activity by forming unlawful assembly and they forcefully tried to enter into the polling area and abused DMK party. Thereafter, they threatened to manhandle the police officers and damaged the barricades and also made death threat. The case is registered for the offence under Sections 143, 294(b), 341, 353, 506 (ii) of IPC and Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992. The offence under Section 3 of Tamil Nadu Public Property (Prevention of Damage and Loss) Act, 1992 is a punishable offense with 5 years of imprisonment. Therefore, he prayed for dismissal of the petitions.

8. Considered the rival submissions of the parties and perused the records filed in support of the petitions.

9. From the narration of the facts stated above, it is clear that during election for District Council Vice President, the members of the two rival political parties namely DMK and AIADMK fought with each other, making allegations against each others. It is not in dispute that the petitioners are all belong to AIADMK political party and they have permanent residence in Tamil Nadu. Though the FIR is registered under Sec