Protest to safeguard students’ future is not unlawful: HC

Protest to safeguard students’ future is not unlawful: HC

K Kaushik@timesgroup.com

Madurai:12.07.2021 

A protest with an intention to safeguard the future of students cannot be construed as unlawful assembly, the Madras high court has said while quashing the final report filed against people who staged a protest seeking action against 30 bogus nursing and paramedical colleges in 2016.

The prosecution case was that the four petitioners along with others belonging to Abdul Kalam Latchiya India Party carried out a protest without prior permission against the bogus institutions and blocked the road disrupting traffic in Dindigul on April 14, 2016. Based on a complaint from the sub inspector of police, Dindigul Town North police registered a case against the protesters under sections 188, 143 and 145 of IPC. The police also filed the final report which was taken cognizance of by the Dindigul judicial magistrate II court. The four petitioners had filed the petition seeking to quash this report.

Justice G Ilangovan observed that for taking cognizance of offence under Section 143 of IPC, the ingredients under Section 141 of IPC must be brought on record. It appears that the petitioners and others staged a protest to initiate necessary action against bogus nursing and para medical colleges which spoiled the life of students. The court observed that there is no material on record or collected during the investigation to show that the agitation ended in violence. Hence, the ingredients of offence under Section 141 of IPC are not applicable to the present occurrence.

The judge said that in Section 145 of IPC, the words “unlawful assembly” are mentioned. The petitioners and others held the agitation with an intention to safeguard the future of students and hence it should not be considered as unlawful assembly.

“Registration of case and filing of final report may not be considered to be proper since the right of agitation has been recognized and that too conducting the agitation without any violence cannot be considered to be per se illegal,” observed the judge. Though only four people had approached the court, the judge quashed the final report in its entirety.