Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 39304
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
R.VIJAYAKUMAR, J
G.Muthu – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Crl.OP.(MD)No.6442 of 2026|Crl.M.P(MD)Nos.6980 & 6984 of 2026|S.T.C.No.4862 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: M/s.S.Malaikani
For the Respondents:Mr.A.Albert James Government Advocate(crl.side) for R1
Peaceful protest obstructing pathway without violence or damage not punishable; quashing charge sheet upheld.
Headnote:The petitioners were charged under Sections 143, 283 and 291 of IPC for obstructing a public pathway by erecting a shamiana and protesting against the establishment of a private solar energy company, despite cautions from authorities. The court found no allegations of assault or damage to public property, only peaceful protest. The continuation of proceedings was deemed an abuse of process. Issues framed included whether the charge sheet warranted trial continuation given the peaceful nature of the protest. The court held that obstructing a pathway during peaceful democratic protest without violence does not justify criminal proceedings. The charge sheet in S.T.C.No.4862 of 2025 stands quashed; petition allowed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition to quash charge sheet for protest obstruction. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. peaceful protest; no need for trial continuation. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. no violence alleged; proceedings quashed as abuse. (Para 5 , 6) |
for R1 * * * * * ORDER The present petition has been filed by A1 to A9 and A11 and A13 in S.T.C.No.4862 of 2025, on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli, seeking to quash the charge sheet wherein the petitioners are charged with the offences under Sections 143, 283 and 291 of IPC.
2. A perusal of the charge sheet reveals that the petitioner along with others have put up a shyamina in a common pathway and staged a protest as against the establishment of a private solar energy company. As per the charge sheet, despite caution from the authorities, the accused persons have not left the spot.
3. According to the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, the general public were only protested in a peaceful democratic manner and the charge sheet does not warrant any continuation of the trial.
4. I have considered the submissions made on either side and perused the materials available on record.
5. A perusal of the FIR clearly reveals that the petitioner along with others have raised protest as against the establishment of private solar energy company in their locality. They are said to have obstructed the public pathway and there is no allegation of any assault or any damage to the public property.
6. Considering the above said facts, the continuation of the criminal proceedings as against the petitioners is only be an abuse process of law.
7. In view of the above said facts, the charge sheet in S.T.C.No.4862 of
2025, stands quashed. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are also closed.
