VETRIVEL Vs. INSPECTOR OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in S.T.C.No.662 of 2017 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District.

(2.) The case of the prosecution is that on 09.09.2016, while conducting Vinayagar idol procession at Aruppukkottai, at about

(3.) 45 p.m to 04.15 p.m, the petitioners violated the promulgation order and attempted to continue Vinayagar idol procession with beating musical instrument. They blocked the road and prevented the officials from discharging their duties. Further, the petitioners abused them and also criminally intimidated them. Hence, the first respondent register a case in Crime No.637 of 2016 for the offences under Sections 143 , 188 , 341 , 353 , 294 (b) and 506 (i) of IPC , as against the petitioners. After completion of investigation, the first respondent filed charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate Court, Aruppukkottai, Virudhunagar District, and the same was taken cognizance in S.T.C.No.662 of 2017. The said criminal proceedings is under challenge in this criminal original petition. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would submit that on 09.09.2016, the petitioners and other General Public conducted Vinayagar idol Procession at Aruppukkottai after obtaining prior permission from the concerned authorities. But middle of procession, the first respondent and other police officials without any valid reasons arrested the petitioners, used force as against the petitioners and the other general public. He further submitted that the offence under Section 188 of IPC is concerned, the concerned officer, who promulgated the prohibitory order must be the complainant. But, in this case, the complainant/second respondent, who is not competent authority to pass promulgation order. He further submitted that the petitioners and the other General Public conducted Vinayagar Idol Procession peacefully after obtaining prior permission from the authorities. He further submitted that there is absolutely no witnesses have spoken about the occurrence and to connect the petitioners, there are no materials to proceed with the trial. When there is no material to proceed with the trial, the petitioners unnecessarily would not have put them an ordeal trial. Therefore, he prayed for quashment of the criminal proceedings.