Murugan v. State Represented By

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 24.07.2019

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N. ANAND VENKATESH Crl.O.P No.19600 of 2019 and Crl.M.P No.10051 of 2019

1. Mr.Murugan

2. Mr.Ravi

3. Mr.Ramesh

4. Mr.Velu

5. Mr.Narayanamoorthi

6. Mr.Murali

7. Mr.Arivarasu

8. Mr.R.Kumar

9. Mr.Manogaran

10. Mr.Anthonygrouse

11. Mr.Narayanan

12. Mr.Rajamani

13. Mr.Suthagar

14. Mr.Sankar

15. Mr.Venkatesan

16. Mr.Ganapathy

17. Mr.Sarthar

18. Mr.Ramasubbu

19. Mr.Gangatharan

20. Mr.Ulaganathan

21. Mr.Ayyappan

22. Mr.Siva

23. Mr.Francis Anthony

24. Mr.S.Muthukrishnan

25. Mr.R.Paranthaman

26. Mr.V.C.Sekar

27. Mr.G.Anbu

28. Mr.Ramajayam

29. Mr.R.Venkatesan

30. Mr.Krishnan

31. Mr.G.Rangasamy

32. Mrs.M.Jayanthi

33. Mr.K.Shanmugam

34. Mr.Senthamizh Menon

35. Mr.K.Jayaraman

36. Mr.Kuppusamy

37. Mr.K.Vijayakumar

38. Mr.Subhang

39. Mr.Murugesan

40. Mr.M.Subramaniyam

41. Mr.B.Ganapathy

42. Mr.B.Murugan

43. Mr.Mohan

44. Mr.Jothi

45. Mr.M.Palani

46. Mr.Kirubakaran

47. Mr.K.Elangovan

48. Mrs.Poongodi

49. Mr.Uthayakumar

50. Mr.K.Jothibabu

51. Mr.M.PArthasarathi

52. Mr.K.Balamurugan

53. Mr.V.Elumalai

54. Mr.D.Ganesan

55. Mr.R.Kumar

56. Mr.C.PRabu

57. Mr.M.Thirumalai

58. Mr.Thanchi

59. Mr.R.Dhandapani

60. Mr.Sakthivel

61. Mr.Deivendran

62. Mr.R.Kasinathan

63. Mr.Mari Michael Fernandas

64. Mr.N.Seenuvasan

65. Mr.M.Sartharbasha

66. Mr.V.Solaiappan

67. Mr.R.Paulraj

68. Mr.E.Balachandar

69. Mr.P.Anburaja

70. Mr.R.Mohan

71. Mr.A.Sabariraj

72. Mr.A.Dhayalan

73. Mr.K.Yugakalaivan

74. Mr.V.Pandiyan

75. Mr.Kutralanadhan

76. Mr.R.Velu

77. Mr.K.Perumal

78. Mr.K.Anbalagan

79. Mr.Balakrishnan

80. Mr.R.Selvakumaran

81. Mr.K.Murugan

82. Mr.V.Vengatesan

83. Mr.Varatharajan

84. Mr.Kannadasan

85. Mr.R.Moorthy

86. Mr.Amaresan

87. Mr.G.Gopinath

88. Mr.L.Parthipan

89. Mr.V.Arasu

90. Mr.S.Sekar

91. Mr.S.Ram

92. Mr.D.Nandhanvel

93. Mr.K.Vasu

94. Mr.S.Saiyathnasar

95. Mr.I.Vijayan

96. Mr.G.Ramachandiram

97. Mr.K.Saravanan

98. Mr.G.Vengatapathy

99. Mr.Namachivazhan

100. Mr.Saravanan

101. Mr.Devirajan

102. Mr.Palani

103. Mr.Anbalagan

104. Mr.Vinothkumar

105. Mr.Sanmugam

106. Mrs.M.Bavani

107. Mrs.Rani

108. Mrs.Kanmani

109. Mr.S.Sakthivel

110. Mr.Santhappan

111. Mr.Namachivazhan

112. Mrs.K.Radha

113. Mrs.Boobathiyammal

114. Mr.Sowthararajan

115. Mrs.Jansibiraba

116. Mr.Kumar

117. Mr.Ravikumar

118. Mr.Sowdarapandiyan

119. Mrs.Latha

120. Mrs.Santhi

121. Mrs.Pathmavathi

122. Mrs.Parimala

123. Mrs.Indiragandhi

124. Mrs.Vanathi

125. Mr.Inbaraji

126. Mr.Muthu

127. Mr.Rajeshkumar

128. Mr.Gopinath

129. Mr.Anthoniraj

130. Mr.Thilagam

131. Mr.Vengatesan

132. Mr.Shanmugam

133. Mrs.Rajeswari

134. Mrs.Sumathi

135. Mrs.Mala

136. Mrs.Barani

137. Mrs.Visali

138. Mr.Sundaravadivelu

139. Mr.Manigandan

140. Mr.Vengatraman

141. Mr.Palani

142. Mrs.Leemarose

143. Mrs.Mageswari

144. Mrs.Vijayalakshmi

145. Mrs.Poonkodi

146. Ms. Ramya

147. Mrs. Valliyammal

148. Mrs. Jayalakshmi

149. Mr. Ramesh

150. Mr. Saravanan

151. Mrs. Gomathi

152. Mrs. Revathi

153. Mrs. Pappitha

154. Mrs. Vachala

155. Mrs. Agila

156. Mr. Ayyasamy

157. Mr. Gunasekar

158. Mr. Kareem

159. Mrs. Lakshmibai

160. Mrs. Santhi

161. Mrs.Sathiyabama

162. Mrs. Mageswari

163. Mrs. Anbu

164. Mrs. Rasheena

165. Mr. Ramesh babu

166. Mrs. Gowri

167. Mrs. Padhmavathi

168. Mrs. Jayasudha

169. Mrs. Mutharanisha

170. Mrs. Jeeva

171. Mrs. Kannagi

172. Mrs. Sumathi

173. Mr. Giri

174. Mr. Vengatesan

175. Mr.Karthickraja

176. Mrs. Gomathi

177. Mrs. Pushpalatha

178. Mrs. Saravanakumari

179. Mr. Dhanraj ... Petitioners vs.

1. State Represented by Sub-Inspector of Police, Thiruvannamalai Town Police station, Thiruvannamalai.

2. Mrs.J.Elavarasi Respondents PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, to call for the records in

Crime No.1578 of 2018 dated 26.11.2018 for offences under Sections 143, 285 and 341 of IPC pending on the file of the 1st respondent.

For Petitioners : M/s.T.Lajapathi Roy For Respondents : Mr.M.Mohanded Riyaz Additional Public Prosecutor for R1

ORDER

This Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash the FIR in Cr.No.1578 of 2018 registered under Sections 143, 285 and 341 IPC, against the petitioners.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent Police.

3. This Court already had an occasion to consider the very same issue and had quashed the proceedings in Crl.O.P.[MD]. No.3860 of 2019 by an order dated 14.03.2019. The relevant portions of the order is extracted hereunder: "4. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioners staged the protest against the Government Orders. In the course of agitation, the Government Order namely G.O.Ms.Nos.303 and 234 were alleged to have been burnt by the accused persons. Hence, the complaint has been filed by the second respondent.

5. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that on the face of the FIR, no offence is made out and for the offence under Section 285 IPC, there must be fire to endanger human life. Mere burning of a paper even though it may be a Government Order is not likely to endanger human life. There is no indication that the burning of a piece of paper endangers human life.

6. This Court in A.Santhos Yadav .Vs. the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu, Chennai [2015 (40) CTC 317] has held as follows:

A careful reading of Section 285 would show that the mere burning of an effigy, by itself, was not made a punishable offence under the IPC. In fact, there is not even a reference in Section 285, I.P.C., to the burning of

effigies. Section 285 is actually inserted in Chapter XIV of the I.P.C., which deals with offences affecting public health, safety, convenience, decency and morals. Section 285, itself is grouped along with offences dealing with negligence. The manner in which Section 285 is worded would show that doing anything with fire or any combustible matter any act so rashly or negligently as to endanger human life or to be likely to case hurt or injury to any other person, is made punishable. Therefore, acting rashly or negligently so as to endanger human life or in a manner likely to cause hurt or injury, is a sine qua non for making an act come within the meaning of Section 285."

7. This Court is in agreement with the above said judgment. Hence, the Impugned FIR in Crime No.2014 of 2018 dated 26.11.2018 pending on the file of the respondent no.1 is quashed and accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed."

4. The above order will squarely apply to the facts of the present case.

5. In the result, the FIR in Cr.No.1578 of 2018, is hereby quashed and accordingly this Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS III) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar rka To

1. The Sub-Inspector of Police, Thiruvannamalai Town Police station, Thiruvannamalai.

2. The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Madras.

+1cc to Mr.K.Thilageswaran, Advocate sr.63306 Crl.O.P No.19600 of 2019 and Crl.M.P No.10051 of 2019 rr(co) nr 23/09/2019