HAROON RASITH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in C.C. No. 6040 of 2018, pending on the file of the XIV Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Egmore, Chennai (Trial Court).

(2.) The gist of the case is that on 3/4/2018, at about 03.30 p.m., when the respondent Police along with his team were on patrol duty, near Egmore Railway Station, 85 persons belonging to Manithaneya Jananayaga Party under the leadership of 1st petitioner had assembled and raised slogans against the Central and State Government of Tamil Nadu for Non forming of Kaveri Management Board, without getting any prior permission. When they were asked to disperse and not to create any law and order problem, they failed to do so. Hence, they were arrested in the spot by the respondent Police and a case in Crime No. 166 of 2018 was registered, for offence under Ss. 143, 188, 353 and Sec. 41 of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act, 1888. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed before the trial Court and the same was taken on file as C.C. No. 6040 of 2018, for offence under Ss. 143, 353, Sec. 41 of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act, 1888 and Sec. 7(1)(a) of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 2005, listing 7 witnesses as LW1 to LW7, as against which, the present Criminal Original Petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that it is not the case that the petitioners and other accused blocked the free movement of traffic and caused any inconvenience to the public. He further submitted that out of seven witnesses, LW1 to LW4 and LW7 are police personnel attached to the respondent Police Station. LW5 and LW6, who are witnesses to the Observation Mahazar and Rough Sketch, are obliging witnesses to the Police. It is highly improbable that no public had come to lodge a complaint, which would prove the fact that the respondent Police projected a false case against the petitioners. 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 occurred. He further submitted that it is the duty of the Government to protect the rights of freedom of speech and assemble, which are essential to a democracy. The petitioners or any other members had never involved in any unlawful assembly and there is no evidence that the petitioners restrained anybody.