Allowed¶35

Salamon v. State Rep. by Inspector of Police

Madras HC3 Jun 2026CRL OP/14077/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Madras HC quashes FIR Crime No.1334 of 2021 (Sriperumbudur PS, dated 24.11.2021) against protester Salamon, one Santhosh and 100 unnamed accused booked under IPC Ss.147/188/353/270 and DM Act 51(b) for a Covid-period protest near Sriperumpudhur Bus Stand against the Palnellur Panchayat President; held that Jeevanandham (2018 2 LW (Crl) 606) and Sri Raja (Crl.O.P No.7922 of 2019, dt. 30.08.2019) apply on all fours; FIR quashed against all accused; petition under S.528 BNSS, 2023 allowed (M. Nirmal Kumar J., 03-06-2026). Keywords: quash FIR, Covid-19 protest, democratic right to protest, Disaster Management Act 51(b), Section 528 BNSS.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of the FIR in Crime No.1334 of 2021 against the petitioner and all other accused. ¶35

Salamon Vs State Rep. by Inspector of Police — Madras HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Quashing of the FIR in Crime No.1334 of 2021 against the petitioner and all other accused.

¶35

Issue for consideration

Whether the FIR in Crime No.1334 of 2021 registered against the petitioner and others for staging a protest near Sriperumpudhur Bus Stand during the Covid-19 period (offences under Sections 147, 188, 353, 270 of IPC and 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005) is liable to be quashed.

¶27

Court's answer

This Court held that the decisions in Jeevanandham and Sri Raja would apply on all fours to the present case, that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings pending, and that the FIR was liable to be quashed.

¶34

Ratio / Principle

The FIR in Crime No.1334 of 2021 stands quashed not only against the petitioner but also against all other accused.

¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

CRL OP No. 14077 of 2026 (Madras High Court, M. Nirmal Kumar J., 03-06-2026) — Petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to quash FIR in Crime No.1334 of 2021 dated 24.11.2021 of C-1 Sriperumbudur Police Station — Petitioner Salamon, named accused along with one Santhosh and 100 unnamed accused (50 men, 50 women), booked under Sections 147, 188, 353, 270 of IPC and 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 — Protest near Sriperumpudhur Bus Stand against the Panchayat President of Palnellur during the Covid-19 period; police (Arul, Baskar, Raja) requested dispersal citing non-maintenance of social distancing — Petitioner contended he was exercising his democratic right to protest against a panchayat president swindling public money, that social distance was maintained, that there was no complaint of obstruction to the public and no report of spread of corona — Reliance placed on Jeevanandham (2018 2 LW (Crl) 606) and Sri Raja (Crl.O.P No.7922 of 2019, decided on 30.08.2019), in which proceedings were quashed; Govt. Advocate endorsed that the facts are akin to those cases and that the protest violated the Government Order during the Covid-19 pandemic — Court held the said decisions apply on all fours, that no useful purpose would be served by keeping the proceedings pending, and quashed the FIR against the petitioner and all other accused — Criminal original petition allowed.

¶1

CRL OP No. 14077 of 2026

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶3

DATED: 03-06-2026

¶4

CORAM

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE M. NIRMAL KUMAR

¶6

CRL OP No. 14077 of 2026

¶7

Salamon S/o. Munusamy, No.423 Small Street, Narasingapuram, Thiruvallur District, Tamilnadu - 631 402.

¶8

..Petitioner(s)

¶9

¶10

State Rep. by Inspector of Police C-1, Sriperumbudur Police Station, Kancheepuram District.

¶11

P. Kumar Village Administrative Officer, Sriperumbudur Taluk.

¶12

..Respondent(s)

¶13

PRAYER: The criminal original petition filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 to call for the entire records pertaining to Cr.No.1334 of 2021 dated on 24.11.2021 on the file of the 1^st respondent police and quash the same and pass such further or other suitable order or orders as this Honble Court may deems fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.

¶14

For Petitioner(s): Mr.P. Santhosh Kumar For Respondent(s): Mr.A. AMARNATH Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) for R1

¶15

__________ Page1 of 5

¶16

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶17

CRL OP No. 14077 of 2026

¶18

ORDER

¶19

The petitioner/named accused along with one Santhosh and 50 men and

¶20

50 women unnamed accused in Crime No.1334 of 2021 for offences under Sections 147, 188, 353, 270 of IPC and 51(b) of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 had filed this quash petition.

¶21

2.The gist of the prosecution is that on 24.11.2021, the VAO found the petitioner and others near Sriperumpudhur Bus Stand squatting on the main road leading to Thiruvallur. They claimed to belong to an association in the name of Ambedkhar Pothuvudamai Munnani and the petitioner was leading the protest. The petitioner along with Santhosh, mobilised 100 persons and staged a protest against the Panchayat President of Palnellur to arrest him. The police personnel , namely Arul, Baskar, Raja went there and requested them to disperse and also informed that during the period of Corona, the petitioner and others assembled not following the social distancing and they are precipitating and activating the spread of corona. Hence, the complaint has been lodged.

¶22

3.The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner and others were only exercising their democratic right to protest against the panchayat president, who was swindling the public money and not providing the benefits intended to the Villagers. The petitioners were keeping proper social distance and there is

¶23

Page2 of 5

¶24

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶25

CRL OP No. 14077 of 2026

¶26

no complaint that they caused any obstruction to the public. Further, there is no report to show that due to the assembly of the petitioner and others, there was spread of corona.

¶27

4.It is his further submission that the facts of the instant case are similar to the facts of the cases in Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District reported in ( 2018 2 LW (Crl) 606) and Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and others (Crl.O.P No.7922 of 2019, decided on 30.08.2019), in which the proceedings were quashed. Hence, he prayed to quash the criminal proceedings.

¶28

5 .The learned Govt. Advocate (Crl.side) appearing for the first respondent Police submitted that the present case was registered due to the protest conducted in violation of the Government Order during Covid-19 pandemic. He also endorsed the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the facts of the instant case are akin to the facts in the aforesaid two cases.

¶29

6.Having heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and upon

¶30

perusal of the entire materials available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the above said decisions would apply on all fours to the present case and

¶31

Page3 of 5

¶32

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶33

CRL OP No. 14077 of 2026

¶34

that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the proceedings pending and the same is liable to be quashed, accordingly, quashed the FIR in Crime No.1334 of 2021 not only against the petitioner but also all other accused.

¶35

7.In view of the above, the criminal original petition is allowed.

¶36

03-06-2026

¶37

Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No sms

¶38

¶39