Madras High Court
Mr.S.P.Udayakumar vs State Represented By on 18 April, 2022
Author: G.Ilangovan
Bench: G.Ilangovan
1
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
Dated: 18/04/2022
CORAM:
THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN
Crl.OP(MD)No.19358 of 2018
and
Crl.MP(MD)No.8756 of 2018
Mr.S.P.Udayakumar : Petitioner/A1
Vs.
1.State represented by
Inspector of Police,
Kudankulam Police Station,
Tirunelveli District.
(Crime No.340 of 2012) : R1/Complainant
2.Mr.Lingha Thirumaran,
Inspector of Police,
Vijayanarayanam Police Station,
Tirunelveli. : R2/De-facto Complainant
Prayer: Criminal Original Petition has been filed
under section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, to call
for the records pertaining to the Charge Sheet in PRC No.
45 of 2014 pending before the Judicial Magistrate Court,
Vallioor, Tirunelveli District and quash the same as
against the petitioner.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
2
For Petitioner : Mr.T.Lajapathi Roy
For 1st Respondent : Mr.B.Nambi Selvan
Additional Public Prosecutor
For 2nd Respondent : No appearance
O R D E R
The criminal original petition has been filed seeking quashment of the case in PRC No.45 of 2014 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Vallioor, Tiruneveli District.
2.The case of the prosecution in brief:-
On 09/09/2012 in the night at 2.00 am under the Leadership of this petitioner, the other accused persons were assembled illegally, raised slogans and staged protest with deadly weapons in the prohibited area, where the Atomic Nuclear Power Centre is located. When they were prevented from further proceeding, they abused the police team in filthy language and also tried to enter the atomic cell and also caused damage to the compound wall. Based upon the complaint given by the de-facto complainant, a case in Crime No.340 of 2012 has been registered for the offences under sections 147, 148, 294(b), 353, 188, 506(ii) IPC and section 3 of TNPPDL https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 3 Act. After completing the formalities of investigation, final report was filed and it was taken in PRC No.45 of 2014 by the Judicial Magistrate, Vallioor.
3.Seeking quashment of the same, the first accused is before this court.
4.Heard both sides.
5.The petitioner/A1 is considered to be the Leader of the protest team. Several cases have been registered against the protestors and number of cases have also been quashed by this court against several persons and more particular, against this petitioner also number of cases have been quashed by this court in Crl.OP(MD)Nos.19355, 19356 and 19962 of 2018, dated 31/01/2022 (Mrs.S.P.Udayakumar Vs. State and another), wherein this court passed a detailed order by quoting the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of G.Sundarajan Vs. Union of India [(2013)6 SCC 620]. In that case, the Hon'ble Supreme Court advised the State Government to drop the criminal proceedings against the protestors and a detailed order has been made in this aspect. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 4
6.But however, at the time of hearing, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor would submit that the Government has passed GO in this regard in pursuance of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Crl.A No.368 dated 04/09/2021. But, this case is not covered in the above said GO. But the said GO is concerned only for the sitting MLAs, former MPS and MLAs in respect of protestors that has been taken by them against the Agricultural Amendment Law, National Register of Citizen/Citizenship Amendment Act, Eight Lane/Methane/Neutrino issues. Even the Koodankulam issue is also covered, but this crime number is not mentioned. This, according to the learned Additional Public Public Prosecutor, the accused have indulged in damaging the compound wall. The cases registered against this petitioner were quashed in some of the matters where there were no damage to the public properties. As far as the present case is concerned, it appears that the damage was caused to the compound wall. So this is not a fittest case to quash the proceedings against the petitioner and accordingly, this is petition is liable to be dismissed. https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 5
7.In the result, this Criminal Original petition is dismissed. Consequently connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
18/04/2022 Index:Yes/No Internet:Yes/No er Note :
In view of the present lock down owing to COVID-19 pandemic, a web copy of the order may be utilized for official purposes, but, ensuring that the copy of the order that is presented is the correct copy, shall be the responsibility of the advocate/litigant concerned.
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis 6 G.ILANGOVAN, J er To,
1.The Judicial Magistrate, Vallioor.
2.The Inspector of Police, Kudankulam Police Station, Tirunelveli District.
3.The Inspector of Police, Vijayanarayanam Police Station, Tirunelveli.
4.The Additional Public Prosecutor, Madurai Bench of Madras High Court, Madurai.Crl.OP(MD)No.19358 of 2018
18.04.2022 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis