DHATCHINAMOORTHI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Criminal Original Petitions have been filed by the same petitioner to quash the proceedings in Crime No.95 of 2016 dated 07.03.2016 and Crime No.513 of 2016 dated 25.10.2016 thereby having been taken cognizance for the offences under Sections 143, 188 and 341 of I.P.C and 143 and 188 of I.P.C respectively as against the petitioner.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that (i) on 07.03.2016, at about 2.00 p.m., the petitioner along with 57 students were gathered blocking the road at Thiruvarur Depot of TNSTC, , against the staff of TNSTC, Thiruvarur, since the petitioner was assaulted by them and (ii) on 25.10.2016, at about 10.30 a.m., the petitioner along with some college students organized a rally gathering in front of the Revenue Department Office for demonstration and raised slogans to take action against the college Prof. M.Kumaran for teasing woman student of the college, without getting prior permission from the concerned authority. On the basis of the above said allegations, the respondent police registered the complaint and filed a charge sheet against the petitioner for the offences under Sections 143, 188 and 341 of IPC in Crime No.95 of 2016 and under Sections 143 and 148 of IPC in Crime No.513 of 2016, on the file the first respondent.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner is a social activist who is functioning for the welfare of the students and has been raising voice with regard to legal rights of the students and to protect the interest of the public. In order to draw the attention of the State Government, the petitioner along with several members had protested against the staff of the TNSTC, Thiruvarur and Prop.Mr. Kumaran, in the Thiru. Vi.Ka. College, for their illegal activities against the students. The learned counsel further submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India has held that the right to freely assemble and also right to freely express once view or constitutionally protected rights under Part III and their enjoyment can be only in proportional manner through a fair and non-arbitrary procedure provided in Article 19 of Constitution of India. 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 petitioner or any other members had never involved in any unlawful assembly and there is no evidence that the petitioner or others restrained anybody. However, the officials of the respondent police had beaten the petitioner and others. When there was lot of members involved in the protest, the respondent police had registered this case, under Section 143, 341 and 188 of IPC as against the petitioner. Therefore, he sought for quashing the proceeding.