JAYARAJAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONERS and others (since acquitted), stood trial for offence punishable under S. 143,147,148,332 and 307 read with S. 149 IPC. At or about 10. 30 a. m. on 25-8-1984, petitioners and others are alleged to have formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and committed rioting, armed with deadly weapons, and other offences, in prosecution of the common object of the said assembly. PETITIONERS were convicted of offences under S. 143 and 332, while others were acquitted of all the charges.

(2.) PROSECUTION case is that, a procession was taken out under the leadership of first accused on 25-8-1984, in connection with a 'bundh'. Lorry bearing registration No. K. L. I. 1149, driven by pw. 8, came that way and petitioners and others intercepted the lorry. and attempted to causa damage to it. Upon this, Pws. 1 to 5, Police Officers on duty, intervened and prevented petitioners and others from committing offences. Then, petitioners are alleged to have pelted stones, causing injuries to Pws. 1 to 4 and deterring them from discharging their duties. Soon after the occurrence, Pw. 1 made a First Information report, naming all the petitioners. Acting on the evidence of Pws. 1 to 5, courts below found the charges under S. 143 & 332 IPC, and convicted petitioners accordingly.

(3.) THE right to dissent and protest, are important to a democratic society. As Jefferson said, 'a little rebellion now and then is a good thing. It is a medicine necessary for sound health of Government'. Maintenance of opportunity for free political thought and expression, is a fundamental principle of Constitutional Government, according to Chief Justice hughes. Very often in a dialectic that ideas have with life and experience, great principles have been evolved. But, it means not that, that ideas or philosophies, could be enforced with muscle and might. Violence or vandalism cannot do service for political beliefs. THE tendency to resort to violence and brute force, to sanctify one's beliefs, upsetting the even tenor of life of the community cannot be assented to. That would be negation of the rights of law abiding citizens, particularly the docile and inarticulate, to pursue their occupations in peace. THE tendency to view such transgressions leniently, is unwholesome. Departure from perspectives and institutional policies, cannot be brooked in an area so vital to the serenity of life. THE Sessions Judge erred in interfering with the sentence imposed by the Trial Court. However, in the absence of an appeal by the State, though not without hesitation, I maintain the sentence. Conviction and sentence, are confirmed, and Revision petition is dismissed. . .