Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Madras High Court

M.Suresh vs The Inspector Of Police on 28 January, 2025

Author: M.Nirmal Kumar

Bench: M.Nirmal Kumar

                                                                          Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024

                          BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

                                                    DATED: 28.01.2025

                                                          CORAM:

                              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.NIRMAL KUMAR

                                               Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024
                                                           and
                                               Crl.M.P(MD)No.11889 of 2024
                 M.Suresh                                                            ...Petitioner

                                                             Vs
                 1. The Inspector of Police
                    Thalayuthu Police Station
                    Tirunelveli District

                 2.A.Christy                                                       ...Respondents


                 PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of BSNSS to
                 call for the records of the impugned First Information Report in Crime No.467
                 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent dated 09.10.2024 and quash the
                 same as against the petitioner.


                                  For Petitioners            : Mr.K.Jeyamohan

                                  For Respondents            : Mr.A.Thiruvadi Kumar
                                  No.1                         Additional Public Prosecutor

                                                          ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.467 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent dated 09.10.2024.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 1/5 Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024

2.The case of the prosecution is that on 09.10.2024 at about 7.00 pm., without getting permission from the police the petitioner herein along with other persons have celebrated 100th birthday of Immanuel Sekaran and also without getting any permission they set up the sound amplifier and 15 feet high billboard for the said event. Further on the same day at about 7.30 hrs around 200 people gathered there to hear the speech of their movement leader and supported his speech which obstructed the traffic, hence a case has been registered.

3. The contention of the petitioner is that a false case has been foisted against the petitioner and in this case all the witnesses are official witnesses and no private persons have been examined. The case projected against the petitioner along with other accused is that without getting any permission they set up the sound amplifier and 15 feet high billboard. He would further submit that Section 4A(1a) of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959 does not apply to the Petitioner, as the Petitioner was not involved in the affixing or exhibiting of any advertisements in public places.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 2/5 Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024

4. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the Special Sub Inspector of Police is the complainant in this case. Finding that petitioner along with other accused are the reason for gathering the people and causing obstruction to the traffic in the public place without seeking any permission a case has been registered. The provisions of Section 4A(1a) of the Tamil Nadu Open Places (Prevention of Disfigurement) Act, 1959 are applicable to the Petitioner, as his actions, whether direct or indirect, contributed to the unlawful affixing of advertisements in public places without the requisite consent and his involvement cannot be slightly discarded. He would further submit that now the investigation has been completed and final report has been filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli.

5. Considering the above said submissions of both the counsel for the Petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor, and on perusal of the materials on record, this Court finds that the allegations in the F.I.R. against the petitioner is unfounded and do not disclose any cognizable offence. The petitioner has not been shown to have participated in the unlawful assembly or engaged in any wrongful restraint, and no specific overt act is attributed against him in the F.I.R. Therefore, the continuation of the criminal proceedings would amount to an abuse of the process of law. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3/5 Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024

6. In view of the above, this Court quashes the First Information Report in Crime No.467 of 2024 and all subsequent proceedings against the Petitioner and other accused persons, who are similarly placed. Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition is allowed and further the final report filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate No.III, Tirunelveli is also quashed.

7. In the result, the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

28.01.2025 NCC : Yes/No Internet : Yes/No Index : Yes/No aav To

1. The Inspector of Police Thalayuthu Police Station Tirunelveli District

2.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4/5 Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024 M.NIRMAL KUMAR,J.

aav Crl.O.P(MD).No.19275 of 2024 28.01.2025 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5/5