BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

DATED :02.12.2025

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE L.VICTORIA GOWRI

Crl.O.P.(MD).No.22007 of 2025

and

CRL MP(MD)Nos.18922 and 18923 of 2025

Visweswaran @ viswa

... Petitioner / Accused No.3

Vs.

1.The State of Tamilnadu, Rep. by The Sub Inspector

of Police,

Thilagar Thidal Police Station,

Madurai City.

(Crime No.933 of 2023) ... Respondent No.1 /

Complainant

2.V.Mayan

... Respondent No.2 /

Defacto complainant

Prayer : Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023, to call for the records relating to the proceedings in S.T.C.No.6333 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, dated 07.12.2023 and quash the same in so far as

the petitioners are concerned.

For Petitioner : Mr.M.Prabhakaran

For R-1 : Mr.M.Sakthi Kumar,

Government Advocate (Crl. side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the final report filed in S.T.C.No.633 of 2024 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.II , Madurai, insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

2.The prosecution case, as seen from the final report, is that on 26.11.2023 at about 6.00 p.m., the petitioner arrayed as A3 along with 25 other persons, allegedly gathered at North Masi Street, Madurai, without obtaining prior permission from the competent authorities. It is alleged that they held placards and banners containing the photograph of Thiru Prabhakaran, the deceased leader of the banned organisation LTTE, and raised slogans describing him as the “pride” and “treasure” of the Tamil community, purportedly celebrating his 69th birthday.

3.It is further alleged that the group caused inconvenience to the public and obstructed traffic movement during peak evening hours by displaying life-size photographs and flex banners on both sides of the street. Based on these allegations, the respondent police registered a suo motu FIR in Crime No.933 of 2023 for offences under Sections 147, 341, 290 IPC and Section 4(1) of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959, which correspond to Sections 191, 126, 292 BNS.

4.The petitioner contends that the entire criminal proceedings have been initiated with malafide intent and that he, his father, and his brothers have been unnecessarily roped into the criminal case without any credible evidence.

Submissions:

5.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent police conducted the investigation in a mechanical manner without examining a single independent witness. There is no observation mahazar to identify the place of occurrence, nor any recovery of the alleged placards or flex banners.

6.It is further argued that the ingredients of the offence of rioting under Section 147 IPC are wholly absent, as there is no allegation of use of force by the accused persons. Similarly, no material is available to constitute the offence of wrongful restraint under Section 341 IPC or public nuisance under Section 290 IPC.

7.The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the fixation of a flex board per se is not an offence under the 1959 Act, unless the prosecution proves that it was erected in a prohibited place. No material is produced to show the exact location of the alleged disfigurement.

8.It is urged that the final report is solely based on the statements of police officials under Section 161 Cr.P.C., 1973, with no corroboration from the general public. Therefore, continuation of the proceedings would amount to an abuse of process.

9.The petitioner is stated to be a young first-generation graduate and the sole breadwinner of his family, aspiring to secure employment abroad. The pendency of the criminal prosecution severely affects his career prospects. In the absence of any evidence connecting him to the alleged incident, the impugned proceedings deserve interference.

10.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) submits that the investigation was conducted in accordance with law and sufficient materials were collected to proceed