4 Oct 2021 2:39 PM GMT
The Madras High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to an FIR filed against two persons for conducting a demonstration against the Amendment of CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) noting that the identification of persons, who were involved in the occurrence, was not properly investigated.The Bench of Justice G. Ilangovan observed that it is common knowledge that...
The Madras High Court recently quashed criminal proceedings initiated pursuant to an FIR filed against two persons for conducting a demonstration against the Amendment of CAA (Citizenship Amendment Act) noting that the identification of persons, who were involved in the occurrence, was not properly investigated.
The Bench of Justice G. Ilangovan observed that it is common knowledge that against the Amendment of CAA, several protests, demonstrations, and agitations took across India and abroad also and that the right to protest is well recognized with the only qualification being that it should not end in any violation.
Case in brief
As per the prosecution's case, the petitioners, from an organization called 'Makkal Athikaram' along with other members, made a protest, without getting proper permission from the authorities and they also raised slogans against the Government and also condemned the assault made upon the students of the Jamia University, Delhi.
Subsequently, a case was registered against them for the offence punishable under Sections 143, 341, 283 and 290 IPC
According to the petitioners, they were protesting because, by way of this amendment, discrimination was made against the Srilankan and the Muslims. However, they did not deny that they participated in the above-said protest, however, stated that their names didn't appear in the FIR.
Perusing the First Information Report, the court noted that the petitioners made a protest by shouting slogans against the amendment Act and the Government, however, later on, they dispersed themselves and that it was clear that no untoward or criminal act occurred.
However, stressing that how the petitioners were roped in the above-said offence, is not understandable, the Court observed thus:
"No doubt, conduct(ing) protest, without getting any proper permission, is not proper. They also created nuisance in that place. But, the entire reading of the 161 statement, recording during the course of the investigation, shows that the identification of the person, who are involved in the occurrence, was not properly investigated. None of the statements recorded during the course of the investigation, speak about the identification of the person, who were involved in the demonstration or protest."
In the light of the above discussion, the Court held that there was no prima facie materials available against the petitioners and that it was nothing, but, a clear abuse of process of the Court and law.
So, the Court quashed the proceedings pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No.II, Madurai, and the Criminal Original Petition was allowed.
Case title - Ananthasamy @ Anandasamy and another v. State
Click Here To Download Order