VIRENDRA CHOURASIA Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners have prayed for the following reliefs in this petition:

(2.) The facts, in brief, as projected by the petitioners are that they are resident of Ambikapur, District Surguja and the petitoiner No. 1 is the owner of Chourasia Marriage Garden situated at Ring Road, Ambikapur. Petitioner No. 2 is the father of Harsh Sahu and petitioner No. 3 is the father of Vaishali Sahu. The marriage of Harsh Sahu and Vaishali Sahu was solemnized and the marriage function was to be held at Chourasia Marriage Garden, Ambikapur. Looking to the COVID-19 Pandemic situation in State of Chhattisgarh, the Collector-Cum-District Magistrate were authorized under the Epidemic Disease Act, 1897 (for short, the Act of 1897) and also under the provisions of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (for short, the Act of 2005) to declare any area as containment zone. Pursuant to the aforesaid delegation of power the Respondent No. 2 on 11/4/2021 declared Surguja District as a containment zone. The aforesaid declaration was subsequently extended by various notifications with certain relaxations and obligations. In continuance with the earlier order, on 28/5/2021 Respondent No. 2 issued a notification under the prescriptions of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, the Cr.P.C.), Act of 2005 read with Act of 1897. As per the said notification, certain regulations were prescribed. One of the said regulation was that the marriage functions would be conducted by following COVID-19 protocol and in terms of notification of Government of India dtd. 29/4/2021, the limit of maximum persons to attend the function was prescribed as 50 and all the persons has to go through the COVID-19 test. For ready reference clause 1.4 of notification / order dtd. 28/5/21 is quoted as under:

(3.) On 4/7/2021 one Komal Prasad Sahu, Naib Tahsildar, Ambikapur lodged a report that on 2/7/2021, a marriage was performed in Chourasia Marriage Garden. It is alleged that in the said marriage, in violation of notification dtd. 28/5/2021, approximately 1000 persons were gathered. It was further alleged that the marriage was performed between the son and daughter of petitioner No.2 and 3 whereas the marriage garden is owned by petitioner No.1. According to the F.1.R. since petitioners had violated the regulations contained in the notification dtd. 28/5/2021, therefore they made themselves liable for penal action. On the aforesaid information the Respondent No. 3 registered the present F.I.R. for the offences punishable under Sec. 269 and 188 of I.P.C. and also under Sec. 3 of the Act of 1897.