FAISAL Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Criminal Original Petition has been filed by the petitioner under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to call for the records relating to the case in Cr.No.94 of 2017 on the file of the respondent herein and quash the same as illegal and without jurisdiction.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other persons were illegally assembled and protested in the public road without prior permission against the State Government demanding permanent solution to hold Jallikattu every year. Subsequently, FIR came to be registered in Crime No.94 of 2017 dated 25.01.2017 for the offence under Section 143 and 188 IPC by the respondent police and the same is pending for filing of charge sheet. The petitioner has been roped into the above prosecution by misreading the provision of law. Hence, this petition.

(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner along with other persons assembled and protested in the public road without prior permission against the State Government demanding permanent solution to hold Jallikattu every year. 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 ones 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 1st 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 and others. Therefore, he sought for quashing the proceeding.