Advocates:
['M/S K GOVI GANESAN', '', 'M S THILIP RAJKUMAR', 'DHANWANTHI A', 'R RAJASHAMA GAYATHRI-MS', 'S SRIRAM-MS']

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 29.04.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA

CRL.O.P.NO.10123 OF 2022

Mohanasundaram,

S/o.Subramaniam

... Petitioner

Vs

The State Represented by,

The Inspector of Police,

Negamam Police Station,

Coimbatore District.

(Crime No.145 of 2020)

... Respondent

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of

the Criminal Procedure Code, pleased to call for the records

relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No.145 of 2020 on the file

of the respondent police and quash the same.

For Petitioner

:

Mr.K.Govi Ganesan

For Respondent

:

Mr.A.Gokulakrishnan

Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed, to call

for the records relating to the impugned FIR in Crime No.145 of

2020 on the file of the respondent police and quash the same.

2. The brief facts of the case is that the respondent

has suo motu registered a case in Crime No.145 of 2020 against

the petitioner for the offence punishable under Sections 188,

271 and 291 of IPC. The allegation in the complaint against the

petitioner is that on 31.03.2020, when the Inspector of Police,

Negamam Police Station, along with two other policemen were on

patrol duty to see whether anyone was violating the Section 144

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

Cr.P.C issued by the Central and State Government to prevent the

spread of the Corona, the petitioner was found roaming near

Kamanaickenpalayam check post and when the respondent had

enquired the petitioner, he has not stated any reasons. Based

on the complaint given by the Inspector of Police, a case in

Crime No.145 of 2020 was registered for the offences punishable

under Sections 188, 271 and 291 of IPC.

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would submit that the petitioner was simply riding his two

wheeler and instead of registering the case, the respondent

ought to have warned and asked him to be in door only. He would

further submit that the respondent cannot straight away register

the case under Section 188 of IPC and there is no material to

show that the petitioner had intentionally come out to spread

infection to others.

4. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would further submit that the petitioner has decided to go

abroad for work and also applied for passport. He would further

submit that the Government has also issued orders directing the

withdrawal of cases registered during Covid-19 pandemic period

and the withdrawal cases have registered for violation of Covid-

19 pandemic rules.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner

would further submit that the facts of the case are similar to

the case covered in the decision reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606

[Jeevanandham and others Vs The Inspector of Police

Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated

20.09.2018 and in Sri Raja Vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town

Police Station Virudhunagar District and other in Crl.O.P(MD).

No.7922 of 2019 etc batch dated 30.08.2019.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing

for the respondent would submit that the petitioner was found

riding his motor cycle on 31.03.2020 during Covid-19

pandemic/lockdown period, in defiance the Standard Operating

Procedure (SOP) issued by the Central and State Government. He

would further submit that the facts of this case are covered

under the Judgment referred to above.

7. Heard both sides and perused the materials available

on record.

8. In the Judgment reported in 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606

[Jeevanandham and others Vs The Inspector of Police

Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District] dated

20.09.2018, it has been held that the police has no right to

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

file a case under Section 188 of IPC and to investigate the same

without getting proper permission f