← Library
Madras High CourtCRL OP/22963/2021allowed

Rajinikanth @ Arulmozhli Varman v. The State Rep . By

2021-12-13Honourable Mrs Justice T.V.Thamilselvi3 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

DATED : 13.12.2021

CORAM

THE HONOURABLE MRS.JUSTICE T.V.THAMILSELVI Crl.O.P.No.22963 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos.12587 and 12588 of 2021 Rajinikanth @ Arulmozhli Varman ... Petitioner/Accused 5 Vs.

1. The State rep. by, Inspector of Police, F-1, Chintadaripet Police Station, Triplicane, Chennai - 600 002.

... 1st Respondent/Prosecuting Complainant

2. Kumar Head Constable of Police, F-1, Chintadaripet Police Station (Law and Order), Triplicane, Chennai - 600 002.

... 2nd Respondent/Defacto Complainant Prayer:

Petition filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records in C.C.No.17 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Special Court for Trial of Cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu and to quash the same in so far as the petitioner A-5. For Petitioner :

Mr.R.Thirumoorthy For Respondents :

Mr.E.Raj Thilak Additional Public Prosecutor for R1

O R D E R

The petitioner has filed this petition seeking to call for the records and to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.17 of 2021 on the file of the Additional Special Court for Trial of Cases

related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu as against the petitioner.

2. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner along with other persons were unlawfully assembled under the Secretary of Thiru.Veerapadian, Dravidar Iyakka Thamizhar Peravai without any prior permission raised the slogans against Central Government by demanding the Government to withdraw the Citizenship Amendment Act. Despite warning issued by the police, the petitioner along with others caused danger to the general public. Hence, the respondent police registered the case under Sections 341, 143, 285 of IPC r/w 41(6) CP Act. Thus, the present petition is filed.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the State Government has already withdrawn the cases by passing Government Order in respect of protest made against Citizenship Amendment Act. But the trial Court proceeded against the petitioner. Hence they approached this Court.

4. Furthermore, he submits that though the accused was charged under Sections 341, 143, 285 of IPC r/w 41(6) CP Act which deals about regulating the meetings, assemblies and procession in public places, there is no overtact attributed by the petitioner and others to implicate them under Section 41 of Tamil Nadu Police Act. Further, he also submits that the petitioner and others were charged under Sections 341, 143, 285 of IPC r/w 41(6) CP Act, but there is no material evidence either in the FIR or in the charge sheet to show that they were committed such offence. Even as per the statement given by the witnesses more than 500 persons were participated in the alleged occurrence by raising their slogans but they have not damaged any of the public properties. Considering all these facts he prayed to quash the proceedings.

5. The prosecution has raised objection but admits that many of the cases were withdrawn. Coming to the facts of the case that totally there are 8 accused and they were charged under Sections 341, 143, 285 IPC r/w 41(6) CP Act ,he vehemently opposed the petitioner.

6. On seeing the entire facts it reveals that, with regard to Amendment of Citizenship Act, this petitioner along with other persons were assembled near the Tarapur Tower and they raised the slogan on 12.12.2019 at 5.15 p.m. Except that, there is no evidence to show that the public were arrested due to alleged assembly made by the petitioner nor there is prima facie material evidence to show that they caused damages. As rightly pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there was no material evidence to quash the petitioner and others

under Sections 341, 143, 285 of IPC r/w 41(6) CP Act and there is no vital evidence to proceed against them. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case that they only assembled and raised the slogan against the New Citizenship Amendment Act which comes under their right of expression. Therefore, this Court, find any prima facie material to quash the proceedings against the petitioner.

7. Hence, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and as a sequel, the charge sheet, pending on the file of the Additional Special Court for Trial of Cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly of Tamil Nadu, is quashed. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions, if any, are closed.

Sd/- Assistant Registrar(CS-II) //True Copy// Sub Assistant Registrar drl To

1. The Additional Special Court for Trail of Cases related to Members of Parliament and Members of Legislative Assembly, Tamil Nadu.

2. The Inspector of Police, F-1, Chintadaripet Police Station, Triplicane, Chennai - 600 002.

3. The Public Prosecutor, Madras High Court.

+1cc to Mr.R.Thirumoorthy, Advocate, S.R.No.66563 Crl.O.P.No.22963 of 2021 and Crl.M.P.Nos.12587 and 12588 of 2021 GJ(CO) SU(20/01/2022)