Peaceful protest to air grievances is a fundamental right, and criminal proceedings against such protesters for unlawful assembly are unsustainable if there is no evidence of public disturbance, specific criminal intent, or violation of valid prohibitory orders.

Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 BNSS to call for records and quash the Charge Sheet in S.T.C.No.1283/2025 on the file of Judicial Magistrate - II, Erode and thus render justice.

ORDER

The petitioner / A15 facing trial in S.T.C.No.1283 of 2025 for the offence under Section 147 and 341 IPC pending trial before the learned Judicial Magistrate – II, Erode, had filed this quash petition.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 10.01.2024 the petitioner along with other 47 persons belonging to State Transport Corporation having allegiance to AITUC and CITU, have assembled in front of a bus depot and formed an unlawful assembly causing inconvenience to the public movement and vehicle raising six demands which has not been implemented as agreed by the Management earlier. The respondent police had warned the petitioner and other protestors to move away from the place and not to cause obstruction. Despite the same, they continue to raise slogans and protest. Hence, charge sheet has been filed against them by listing four witnesses.

3. The learned counsel of the petitioner submitted that the petitioner along with the retired Drivers, Conductors and other employees of the State Transport Corporation, had demanded the payment of their retiral and other benefits. Though they raised six demands and it was earlier agreed, the same was not paid. Hence, there was dispute with regard to disbursement of retiral benefits between the State Transport Corporation and the protestors. Due to non disbursement of amount, the petitioner’s family and the families of other employee suffered greatly. The protest was only a democratic means of expressing their grievance and was conducted in front of the depot gate to draw attention to the issue and to sensitize the officials to release their terminal benefits.

4. The learned Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) submitted that when the respondent police was on a patrol duty they found 48 former employees of the State Transport Corporation obstructing the movement of public vehicle and raising slogans. Despite they were asked to disperse, they continued their protest and by timely intervention of the respondent, further law and problem was averted. The petitioner and others without getting permission from the authorities concerned have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly restrained the others and caused public disturbance. On completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed.

5. Considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the materials, it is admitted fact that the petitioner along with retired co-employees gathered together which is their fundamental right. In this case, no public lodged a complaint and no public got affected, due to the unlawful assembly by the petitioners. Hence, this Court finds that the petitioner and others have unlawfully assembled together only to raise protest against the State Transport Corporation demanding their retiral benefits.

6. It is seen that the petitioner and others have followed the rights provided by the Constitution of India and held the protest under the guise of Constitution. A mere reading of the allegations in the final report, the allegations are general in nature and no specific allegations are made against the petitioner and the others to attract the said provisions. Unlawful assembly itself would not amount to commission of offense. Raising slogans and showing protest itself would not amount to commission of offence. Showing Protest is the Hallmark of Democracy, which is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.

7. Admittedly, in this case, the occurrence took plac