ASATHULLAH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to call for the records relating to the case in Cr.No.90 of 2020 on the file of the 1st respondent herein and quash the same.

(2.) It appears that the 1st respondent police initiated suo moto criminal prosecution against the petitioners alleging that the petitioners were protested in the public road against the implementation of the Citizenship Amendment Act and further demanded the Central Government to withdraw the said Citizenship Amendment Act . On receipt of the above information, an FIR was registered in Crime No.90 of 2020 dated 14.02.2020 for the offences punishable under Sections 143 , 341 and 188 of IPC by the 1st respondent and the same is pending for filing of charge sheet. The petitioners herein have not obtained the certified copy for the said FIR and filed a petition for Dispense with the production of the certified copy of the said FIR in the above Criminal Original Petition. Aggrieved by the initiation of criminal proceedings, the petitioners have come forward with the present petition seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No.90 of 2020.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are social activist and have been raising voice for the public cause and public welfare, whenever injustice and inaction of the government machineries. The learned counsel submitted that the registration of FIR in Crime No.90 of 2020 by the 1st respondent police with intent to prohibit the fundamental right to freedom to assemble peaceably and without arms and same amounts to curtailing the dissent voices of the citizens is clearly in violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 14 , 19(1)(a ), 19(1)(b) and 21 the Constitution of India and also to the dictum laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Himatlal K.Shah v. Police Commissioner, Ahemdabad . He further submitted that it is the duty of the Government to protect the rights of freedom of speech and assemble that is so essential to a democracy. According to Section 195(1)(a) of Cr.P.C., no Court can take cognizance of an offence under Section 188 of IPC, unless the public servant has written order from the authority. Further he submitted that the petitioners or any other members had never involved in any unlawful assembly and there is no evidence that the petitioners or others restrained anybody. However, the officials of the respondent police had beaten the petitioners and others. When there was lot of members involved in the protest, the respondent police had registered this case, under Sections 143 , 341 and 188 of IPC as against the petitioners and others. Therefore, they sought for quashing the proceeding.