High Court · 2025

Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRASDATED: 17.03.2025CORAM:THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE G.K.ILANTHIRAIYANCrl.O.P.No.7614 of 2025and CMP.No.4910 of 20251. Ranjith2. Aadhi @ Balamurugan3. Sakthivel4. Anandhan... PetitionersVersus1.State Rep. By The Inspector of Police, Vandavasi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. (Crime No.48 of 2020)2. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vandavasi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.... RespondentsPRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, to call for the records in Crime No.252 of 2023 pending on the file of the first respondent police, and quash the same.For Petitioners: Mr. S. Dilli GaneshFor Respondents : Mr. A. Gopinath, Government Advocate (Crl.side)O R D E RPage 1 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the proceedings in Crime No.252 of 2023 pending on the file of the first respondent police.2.The case of the prosecution is that on 12.09.2023, the petitioners, along with other individuals, had unlawfully assembled in front of the General Hospital, Vandavasi for the death of one Archana in Agilandeeswari College Campus, Vandavasi. The assembly took place without obtaining prior permission and resulted in the blocking of traffic and disturbance to the general public and the free movement of traffic. Therefore, the second respondent had given a complaint and the first respondent registered the case in Crime No.252 of 2023 for the alleged offences under Sections 143, 341 and 290 of IPC, wherein the petitioners were arrayed as A7, A19, A20 and A21.3.The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners are innocent persons and they have not committed any offence as alleged by the prosecution. Without any base, the respondent police Page 2 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025filed the case in Crime No.252 of 2023 for the offences under Sections Sections 143, 341 and 290 of IPC, as against these petitioners. Hence, he prayed to quash the same.4.The learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) would submit that the investigation is nearly complete, with only the filing of the final report remaining. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Advocate (Crl.side) for the first respondent and perused materials available on record.6.It is to be noted that while exercising the power under Section 528 of BNSS, the Court should be slow, at the same time, if the Court finds that from the entire materials collected by the prosecution taken as a whole, would not constitute any offence, in such situation, directing the parties to undergo ordeal of trial will be a futile exercise and it will infringe the right of the persons and in this regard, the Apex Court in State of Haryana and others Vs. Bhajan Lal and Others reported in Page 3 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 20251992 Supp (1) Supreme Court Cases 335, has been held as follows : “........(a) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused;(b) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code;(c) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or ~complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused;(d) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code;Page 4 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025(e) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused;(f) where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party;(g) where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”7. It is also relevant to note the definition of Unlawful Assembly:Page 5 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025“Unlawful Assembly:An assembly of five or more persons is designated an “unlawful assembly”, if the common object of the persons composing that assembly is :(i) to overawe by criminal force, or show of criminal force, the Central or any State Government or Parliament or the Legislature of any State, or any public servant in the exercise of the lawful power of such public servant; or (ii) to resist the execution of any law, or of any legal process; or(iii) to commit any mischief or criminal trespass, or other offence; or(iv) by means of criminal force, or show of criminal force, to any person to take or obtain possession of any property, or to deprive any person of the enjoyment of a right of way, or of the use of water or other incorporeal right of which he is in possession or enjoyment, or to enforce any right or supposed right; or(v) by means of criminal force, or show of criminal force, to compel any person to do what he is not legally bound to do, or to omit to do what he is legally entitled to do.”8.Only when the assembly fit into any of the above Page 6 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025circumstances, it could be construed as unlawful. The accused had not shown any criminal force to commit any mischief, crime or any offence or by way of criminal force or tried to take possession of the property or right to use of incorporeal right which is in possession of enjoyment of others or rights. 9.Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the case in Crime No.252 of 2023 pending on the file of the first respondent for the offences under Sections 143, 341 and 290 of IPC, is hereby quashed as against these petitioners alone. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is also closed.17.03.2025Index: Yes/NoNeutral citation: Yes/NoSpeaking/non-speaking orderkltG.K.ILANTHIRAIYAN, J.kltPage 7 of 8 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Crl.O.P.No. 7614 of 2025To1. The Inspector of Police, Vandavasi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District. (Crime No.252 of 2023) 2. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Vandavasi Police Station, Thiruvannamalai District.3. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras.Crl.O.P.No.7614 of 2025andC.M.P.No.4910 of 202517.03.2025Page 8 of 8