S.Saravanan v. The Inspector Of Police

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED : 27.08.2021

CORAM:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.ILANGOVAN Crl.O.P.(MD)No.12368 of 2021 and Crl.M.P(MD) No.6321 of 2021 S.Saravanan ... Petitioner/Sole Accused Vs.

The Inspector of Police, Balamedu Police Station, Madurai District.

(In Crime No.1368/2020) ... Respondent/Complainant PRAYER: Criminal Original Petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., to call for the records of the case in Cr.No.1368 of 2020 pending on the file of the respondent police and quash the same. For Petitioner : Mr.M.Venkatesan For Respondent : Mr.R.M.Anbunithi Additional Public Prosecutor

ORDER

This petition has been filed to quash the impugned First Information Report registered in Crime No.1368 of 2020, on the file of the first respondent 2.The complaint against this petitioner is that on 25.08.2020, the accused person was found roaming near Mettupatti to Madurai Road, in his two wheeler bearing Reg.No.TN 59 BD 5703, violating the order passed by the Government under Section 144 of Cr.P.C. On the basis of the complaint given by the respondent, a case in Crime No.1368 of 2020, for the offences punishable under Sections 188, 269 and 3 of Epidemic Act 1897 has been registered. 3.Seeking quashment of the First Information Report, this petition came to be filed mainly on the ground that the offence under Section 188 IPC is non-cognizable offence, for which, the first respondent police has no right to file First Information Report and investigate the matter. In respect of other offences, none of the allegations mentioned in the First Information Report attract any of the ingredients of the offence against the petitioner.

1/3

4.Heard both sides.

5.It is found that this petitioner was found roaming nearby Mettupatti to Madurai Road in his two wheeler when COVID-19 protocol was in force. The petitioner did not give any reason or explanation for coming out of the house, defying the order passed by the Government under Section 144 of Cr.P.C. No doubt, defying the Government order and roaming in and around public place during the pandemic situation is mistake on the part of the petitioner. But, however, it is seen that it was only casual outing without any intention of spreading disease. It is also not the case of the prosecution that the petitioner was affected with Covid-19 at the time of alleged occurrence.

Absence of any such material to show that the petitioner was affected by Covid 19 at the time of alleged occurrence, offence under Section 269 and 3 of Epidemic Act, 1897 are also not attracted. As I mentioned earlier, it was the casual outing made by the petitioner without minding the consequences. Instead of filing First Information Report, the respondent ought to have warned the petitioner to go home and remain in home. Without giving such warning, it appears that the case has been registered.

6. It is also to be noted that the Government has also proposed to drop all such cases, which have been registered against the public during pandemic period.

7.Taking totality of the circumstance, the First Information Report in Crime No.1368 of 2020, on the file of the respondent police is required to be quashed and accordingly, the same is quashed and the Criminal Original Petition is allowed. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petition is closed. Sd/- Assistant Registrar (CRL) // True Copy // / /2021 Sub Assistant Registrar(CS) tta 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.

2/3

To 1.The Inspector of Police, Balamedu Police Station, Madurai District.

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

27.08.2021 TP(CO) RS/SKN (23.11.2021) 3P 3C 3/3