Allowed

Jafar Sathick @ Jahabar Sathick v. The Inspector of Police

Madras HC25 Mar 2021CRL OP(MD)/4609/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner filed a Criminal Original Petition to quash an FIR regarding a peaceful protest against Citizenship Law amendments. The Madurai Bench of Madras High Court held that no violence occurred and upholding the petitioner's Article 19 rights, the Court quashed the FIR against the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

First Information Report in Crime No.63 of 2020 quashed as against the petitioner; Criminal Original Petition allowed.

Jafar Sathick @ Jahabar Sathick Vs The… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Madras HC (2021)

¶1

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4609 of 2021

¶2

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT

¶3

DATED : 25.03.2021

¶4

CORAM :

¶5

THE HONOURABLE Mrs. JUSTICE R. HEMALATHA Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4609 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.(MD)No.2578 of 2021

¶6

Jafar Sathick @ Jahabar Sathick ... Petitioner / Accused No.1 Vs.

¶7

1.The State Represented by The Inspector of Police, Boothapandy Police Station, Kanyakumari District. (In Crime No.63 of 2020)

¶8

... 1st Respondent / Complainant

¶9

2.Mariselvan S/o.Not Known, The Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Boothapandy Police Station, Kanyakumari District. ... 2nd Respondent / Defacto Complainant

¶10

Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in Crime No.63 of 2020 on the file of the first respondent and quash the same as illegal as against the petitioner.

¶11

For Petitioner : Mr.S.M.A.Jinnah For 1st Respondent : Mr.A.Robinson Government Advocate (Criminal Side)

¶12

ORDER

¶13

The present petition is filed by the petitioner, seeking for a direction to quash the First Information Report in Crime No.63 of 2020 of Boothapandy Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

¶14

2.A perusal of the First Information Report shows that on 12.03.2020, when the Special Sub-Inspector of Police (2^nd respondent), was on his routine rounds, found the petitioner along with others protesting against the amendments made to the Citizenship Laws. According to the complainant, namely, the Special Sub-Inspector of Police, Boothapandy Police Station, the petitioner and others by their act had not only committed public nuisance, but also caused hindrance to the free flow of vehicular traffic on the road.

¶15

3.Mr.A.Robinson, learned Government Advocate (Criminal Side), who accepts notice on behalf of the first respondent, on https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶16

1/2

¶17

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4609 of 2021

¶18

instructions, would contend that the investigation in Crime No.63 of 2020 of Boothapandy Police Station, Kanyakumari District, is nearing completion.

¶19

4.It is to be pointed out that no untoward incident had taken place. The petitioner has organized the protest and the First Information Report has not disclosed any act of violence. It must be unequivocally emphasized that the Constitution of India gives its Citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression, assemble peacefully and without arms, to form Associations and Unions and to move freely throughout the Territory of India under Article 19 (1) (a), (b), (c) and (d) of the Constitution of India. But of course these rights come with terms and conditions. In the instant case, the protest was peaceful and as already observed no untoward incident took place.

¶20

5.In the circumstances, the First Information Report in Crime No.63 of 2020 on the file of the first respondent, is quashed as against the petitioner and the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

¶21

Sd/-

¶22

Assistant Registrar (P&A)

¶23

// True Copy //

¶24

/ /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS)

¶25

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.

¶26

¶27

The Inspector of Police, Boothapandy Police Station, Kanyakumari District.

¶28

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

¶29

Crl.O.P.(MD)No.4609 of 2021 25.03.2021

¶30

KUN(CO) KB(24.04.2021) 2P 3C

¶31

https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/

¶32

2/2

Jafar Sathick @ Jahabar Sathick v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jafar Sathick @ Jahabar Sathick v. The Inspector of Police

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Madhavan Vs The Inspector of Police

P,Manimuthu @ Manikandan Vs The Inspector of Police

R. Kalyanasundaram Vs Sujith Kumar

Leela.a Vs the Commissioner of Police

P.Nesaraj Vs The Deputy Superintendent of Police

Giridharan Vs the Superintendent of Police