R.P.P.Shanmugasundaram v. The State Of Tamilnadu Rep. By The Inspector Of Police
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 12.02.2026
CORAM:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and Cr.M.P(MD).No.1105 of 2026 R.P.P.Shanmugasundaram ... Petitioner -Vs1. The State of Tamilnadu Rep. By The Inspector of Police Natham Police Station, Dindigul District.
Crime No. 695/2024.
2.Arulkumar Sub-Inspector of Police, Natham Police Station, Dindigul District.
... Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S, to call for the records pertaining to the First Information Report in Crime No. 695 of 2024 on the file of the first respondent police and quash the same so far as this petitioner/accused rank 60 concern.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.P.S.Palanivel Rajan Asst.by Mr.Vishnu J For R1 : Mr.K.M.D.Muhilan Additional Public Prosecutor
O RDER The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the proceedings in Crime No.695 of 2024, pending on the file of the 1st respondent Police.
2.
The case of the prosecution is that on 30.12.2024, the petitioner along with 407 other persons belonging to a political party, involved in "road roko" protest and obstructed the free movement of the public without obtaining prior permission from the competent authority. It is alleged that such acts caused disturbance to the public. Therefore, a case in Crime No.695 of 2024 was registered by the respondent Police for the offences under Sections189(2), 126(2) and 285 of BNS, 2023.
3.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted 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 summons issued on the petitioner.
4.
Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the 1st respondent police endorses the aforesaid submission. 5.
Heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and perused the materials available on record.
6.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the above said decisions would apply on all fours to the present case and that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the proceedings pending and is liable to be quashed. Further, though the present petition has been filed by the petitioner alone, this Court finds that the allegations against the remaining accused are identical and they are similarly placed. Therefore, continuation of the proceedings against them will also an abuse of process of law. 7.
Accordingly, the Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the proceedings pursuant to the First Information Report in Crime No.695 of 2024, on the file of the first respondent Police is hereby quashed in toto as against the petitioner as well as the other petitioners. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
12.02.2026 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order rpl
To
1. The Inspector of Police Natham Police Station, Dindigul District.
2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court, Madras, Chennai
A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA . J, rpl 12.02.2026