BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT Dated : 10/02/2026 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE L. VICTORIA GOWRI and Crl.M.P(MD).No.3028 of 2026

1. R.Arun, 2. V.Boominathan,, 3. A. Myleri,, 4. A. Maharajan, 5. C. Murugesan, 6. K. Arumugam, 7. R. Rakkammal, 8. A. Angammal, 9. Rajadevi, 10. V. Avudayammal,, 11. Jeyamani, 12. K. Parvathi,, ... Petitioners Vs

1. State of Tamilnadu Rep by Inspector of Police, Usilampatti Town Police Station, Madurai District.

Crime No. 315 of 2025..

2. V. Padmanaban, S/o. Vijayaraman, The Village Administrative Officer, Seemamuthu Village, Usilampatti Taluk, Madurai District.. ... Respondents PRAYER :- To call for the records pertaining to the FIR in Crime No. 315 of 2025 on the file of the 1st respondent police dated 18.08.2025 and Quash the same as illegal as far as the petitioners are concerned.

For Petitioners : Mr.J.Jeyakumaran, For Respondents : Mr.B.Thanga Aravindh, Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition is filed to call for the records in Crime No.315 of 2025 on the file of the first respondent police and Quash the same as illegal as far as the petitioners are concerned.

2. The gist of the allegations in the FIR is that in order to remove the encroachment made by some encroachers in S.No.226/16, at Maripatti Village, Usilampatti Taluk, on 18.08.2025 at about 02.00 p.m, the petitioners trespassed the Tahsildar Office at Seemanuthu Village and protested to remove the encroachment made in the above survey and also restrained the officials. Pursuant to the complaint given by the defacto complainant / second respondent, a case in Crime No.315 of 2025 was registered on the file of the first respondent against the accused persons including the petitioners for the offences under Sections 329 (4), 127(2) and 132 of BNS 2023 (Corresponding offence under Sections 448, 342 and 353 of IPC, 1860). Seeking quashment of the same, this Criminal Original Petition is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contend that the impugned charge sheet suffers from fundamental illegality and does not disclose the commission of any cognizable offence. The petitioner submits that peaceful expression of opinion is a constitutionally guaranteed right under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution of India. It is their case that expressing one’s views in a democratic nation cannot be criminalised unless the act satisfies the ingredients of a penal provision.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the FIR does not contain any specific overt act attributable to the petitioner. The complaint does not whisper any material to show that the petitioner indulged in violence, caused disturbance, annoyance or obstruction to any public authority or to the general public. Therefore, the essential ingredients of Sections 329 (4), 127(2) and 132 of BNS 2023 are not attracted against the petitioners.

5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

appearing for the respondent police submitted that the respondent police registered the FIR at the time of the petitioners conducting the protest. According to him, the petitioner have an effective remedy of participating in the investigation rather than seeking quashing at this stage.

6. I have considered the submissions of both sides and perused the materials placed on record. A careful reading of the FIR reveals that no specific overt act has been attributed to the petitioner. There is no allegation of obstruction and criminal intimidation. For a simple offence, the petitioner was charged for serious offences under Sections 329 (4), 127(2) and 132 of BNS 2023.

7. As far as Section 329(4) of the BNS, 2023 is concerned, the definition clause under Section 329(1) provides that whoever enters into or upon property in the possession of another with intent to commit an offence, or to intimidate, insult, or annoy any person in possession of such property, or, having lawfully entered into or upon such property, unlawfully remains there wi