G.THIRUMURUGAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These Criminal Original Petitions have been filed to quash the three FIRs, viz., Crime No.440 of 2017, which was originally filed on the file of the Royapettah Police Station, for the offences under Ss. 143, 188 and 353 IPC, on 21/9/2017 and subsequently altered to Ss. 143, 188, 353, 124A and 153 IPC, which is subject matter of Crl.O.P.No.25575 of 2017; Crime No.1895 of 2017, which was originally filed on the file of the Puzhal Police Station, for the offences under Ss. 120-B, 145, 151, 153-A and 188 IPC, on 30/9/2017 and subsequently altered to Ss. 120-B IPC r/w. 145, 151, 153-A, 188 and 124A IPC, which is subject matter of Crl.O.P.No.25576 of 2017; Crime No.1896 of 2017, which was originally filed on the file of the Puzhal Police Station, for the offences under Ss. 120-B, 145, 151, 153-A, 188 and 179 IPC, on 30/9/2017, and subsequently altered to Ss. 120-B IPC r/w. Ss. 145, 151, 153-A, 188, 124A IPC and 179 of Motor Vehicles Act, which is subject matter in Crl.O.P.No.25777 of 2017.

(2.) The allegations in all these three originally filed FIRs are that the petitioner is the leader of a Movement called May-17 Movement and while he was released from Central Jail after his detention was set aside, people gathered and garlanded him and at that time, he is alleged to have raised slogans against the Government and Police and he proceeded to garland Periyar statue, thereby, the above FIRs came to be registered as against the petitioner, originally for the offences under Ss. 143, 188 and 353 IPC in Crime No.440 of 2017, Ss. 120-B, 145, 151, 153-A and 188 IPC in Crime No.1895 of 2017 and Ss. 120-B, 145, 151, 153-A, 188 and 179 IPC in Crime No.1896 of 2017 and later they were altered to Ss. 143, 188, 353, 124A and 153 IPC in Crime No.440 of 2017; Ss. 120-B IPC r/w. 145, 151, 153-A, 188 and 124A IPC in Crime No.1895 of 2017 and Ss. 120-B IPC r/w. Ss. 145, 151, 153-A, 188, 124A IPC and 179 of Motor Vehicles Act in Crime No.1896 of 2017. Further, the petitioner is alleged to have made statements that they are prepared to fight against kaavi-terrorism and similar terrorism exercised by the previous Government and also warned the ruling party, thereby, Sec. 124A IPC was invoked. In the second FIR, he is alleged to have made statements warning the Government that youth students' force will turn the Indian country and he is also stated to have made statements that the State Government is acting as a benami to the Central Government and it is a shame to Tamil Nadu, thereby, Sec. 124A IPC was slapped against the petitioner. In the 3rd FIR also, similar allegations are made along with yet another statement that, till a separate Tamil Nadu is achieved, he will fight, thereby, Sec. 124A IPC was invoked against the petitioner.

(3.) The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that all the three FIRs have been filed against the petitioner only for political reasons. He further submitted that the petitioner is the co-ordinator of May- 17 Movement and he made certain slogans in a democratic way while he was released from jail after his detention under Act 14 of 1982 was quashed. The learned Senior Counsel submitted that the petitioner has expressed only Dravidian principles of self-respect, which has been given a criminal colour and Sec. 124A IPC has been invoked as against the petitioner. He further contended that none of the offences as alleged in the FIRs has been committed by the petitioner and hence, he sought to quash the FIRs.