MURUGESAN Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under S.482 Cr. P.C. to quash the proceedings in C.C. 258 of 1984, in which the petitioners herein are the accused, pending on the file of the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Virudhachalam.

(2.) The short facts of the case are as follows : The petitioners herein are the members of the Communist Party of India. There had been dissatisfaction among the general public with regard to the conduct of the Sub Inspector of Police. Sri Mushnam Police station. To protest against the high handed actions and attitude of the Sub Inspector of Police, the petitioners assembled and demonstrated before the Sri Mushnam Police station on 8-5-1984 at 9 a.m. It appears that there had been an order of promulgation under S.30(2) of the Police Act by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chidambarant, which was in force then. The Inspector of Police, Sethiathope directed the petitioners to disperse from the place and as the petitioners refused to do so, the Inspector of Police, Sethaiathope registered a case in Sri Mushnam Police station Cr. No. 103/84 against the petitioners. Subsequently, the Inspector of Police, Kattumannargudi took up further investigation and after completing investigation, he filed a report under S.173 Cr. P.C. for offences under Ss.147, 341, 188 and 309, I.P.C. before the Judicial Second Class Magistrate, Vridhachalam. Hence the present petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend with all vehemence and force that even assuming for argument-sake that all the materials available on record in the shape of FIR, 161 statements of witnesses and the allegations in the charge sheet are taken to be true, even then, the petitioners can by no stretch of imagination be mulcted with criminal liability for offences under Ss.147, 341, 188 and 309 IPC. He would further contend that there is no complaint in writing by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Chidambaram, who promulgated an order under S.30(2) of the Police Act and S.195 Cr. P.C. would operate as a bar in launching prosecution against the petitioners unless there is a written complaint by the officer, who issued the promulgation order. The learned counsel for the petitioners took me through the materials available on record and the scanning of the same would point out that the petitioners on the relevant date and time in question had in fact assembled and demonstrated before the Sri Mushnam Police station so as to condemn the high handed activities of the Sub Inspector of Police and observed a taken fast from 9 a.m. till the evening of the same day. As rightly contended by the learned Public Prosecutor, observance of a token strike from morning till the evening cannot at all be construed to be an offence punishable under S.309, I.P.C.