IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

Dated: 24.01.2022

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N. SATHISH KUMAR

Crl. O.P. No. 17481 of 2018

Crl.M.P.No.9051 of 2018

1.R.Umapathy

2.Jeyanesan

3.Thabasi Kumaran

4.Periyar Yuvaraj

5.Dhenraj

6.Munusamy

7.Pandiyan

8.Kumar

9.Manohar

10.Vivek

11.Arunkumar

12.Raji

...Petitioners/ Accused 1 to 12

Versus

The State represented by

The Inspector of Police,

R-1, Mambalam Police Station,

Law & Order,

T.Nagar,

Chennai-600 017.

...Respondent / Complaint

PRAYER : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of

Criminal Procedure Code, to call for the records in C.C.No.8001

of 2017, on the file of the XVII Metropolitan Magistrate,

Saidapet and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.R.Thirumoorthy

For Respondent : Mr.R.Kishore Kumar

Govt.Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Petition has been filed to quash the final report in

C.C.No.8001 of 2017, filed against the accused for the offences

under Sections 143, 188 and 285 IPC, on the file of the XVII

Metropolitan Magistrate, Saidapet.

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

2. The crux of the final report is that the accused

unlawfully assembled and raised slogans to revoke the NEET

examinations conducted by the Central Government and also made

an attempt to fire effigy and thereby, committed offences under

Sections 143, 188 and 285 IPC .

3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners

submitted that they have not assembled unlawfully and they made

their democratic protest over the suicide of the girl student

due to her failure in the NEET examination. As the right to

protest is inherent in the constitutional right, they have not

assembled to commit any offence and offence under Section 143

IPC would not be attracted against the petitioners. Similarly,

the Court cannot take cognizance of the offence under Section

188 IPC, as no the complaint has been made by the public servant

concerned. Similarly, to attract the offence under Section 295

IPC, except stating that the accused made an attempt to burn the

effigy, there are no other materials to show that the accused

had caused any endanger to human life. Hence, prayed to quash

the entire proceedings.

4. Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the

entire materials available on record.

5. The entire materials unearthed by the prosecution shows

that the protest itself is outburst of the suicide of a student

named as Anitha, despite securing highest marks, she could not

secure a seat in higher studies. Therefore, the accused appears

to have made a democratic protest by raising voice against the

Central Government to revoke the NEET Examination. Therefore,

this Court is of the view that if the persons protest in a

democratic manner without having any intention to commit any

offence, their gathering cannot be called as unlawful assembly.

The protest has been made to bring to the notice of the

Government about the death of the girl student and revoke the

NEET examination due to sufferings of some of the students.

Therefore, mere demonstration expressing their view in a

democratic manner cannot constitute any offence under Section

143 IPC. Their gathering to make a protest peacefully and their

act as long not fit into any of the category mentioned under

Section 141 IPC, it cannot be construed as an unlawful assembly.

6. As far as offence under Section 188 IPC, is concerned

the Court can take cognizance of the offence only on the

complaint made by the public servant concerned. The entire

materials unearthed by the prosecution do not show the nature of

promulgation or it has been disobeyed by the accused. Therefore,

the offence under Section 188 IPC would not be attracted in this

case. Similarly, to attract an offence under Section 285 IPC, it

must be shown that the accused acted so rashly or negligently so

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