Click the Play button to listen to article

The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that mere participation in a protest march does not, by itself, make a person a member of an unlawful assembly under Section 149 of the IPC.

The Court observed that where the petitioners, after witnessing the violence, separated themselves from the unruly mob and attempted to save the teachers being assaulted, they could not be treated as members of the unlawful assembly.

Justice Sandeep Sharma remarked that:“Since petitioners herein, after having seen conduct of some of the persons, who allegedly gave beatings to the teachers, separated them from the march and attempted to save the teachers … they cannot be said to be a part of unlawful assembly.” 

Background:

The case arose from a protest march organised on July 29, 2017, following allegations of sexual harassment of a school student by a teacher at Government Senior Secondary School, Khushinagar, Churah.

Some protesters allegedly became violent and assaulted several teachers, leading to registration of FIR No. 82 of 2017 against several persons, including the petitioners, under various provisions of the IPC.

After the police filed the challan, the petitioners approached the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, contending that they had participated in the protest but had neither assaulted the teachers nor shared the common object of the violent mob.

The High Court held that mere presence in a protest march or at the scene of an offence does not ipso facto make a person a member of an unlawful assembly. Liability under Section 149 IPC requires the accused to have shared the common object of the assembly.

The Court found that Dildar Ali Batt and Parvej Ali Batt had separated themselves from the violent mob and attempted to save the teachers. It also noted that the complainant and injured teachers had specifically named the persons who assaulted them, while the petitioners were not named as assailants.

The Court further held that the word “knew” under the second part of Section 149 IPC requires positive knowledge and cannot be equated with a mere possibility. There was nothing on record to suggest that the petitioners were aware that some members of the protest intended to assault the teachers.

The Court consequently found that the chances of conviction were “very bleak” and that continuation of the proceedings would serve no fruitful purpose. It therefore quashed the FIR and all consequential proceedings against the petitioners.

Case Name: Dildar Ali Batt & others v/s State of H.P. & another

Case No.: Cr.MMO No.1092 of 2024

Date of Decision: 20.07.2026

Click Here To Read/Download Order



Tags: