Rajasthan High Court Allows State To Withdraw Prosecution Against Protesting MLAs, Says They Were Only Espousing Public Cause
Rajasthan High Court has allowed the State government to withdraw criminal prosecution against four members of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly and one Ex-MLA, pending before the Ramganj Mandi judicial magistrate for unlawful assembly.The single-judge bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman observed that the accused politicians were merely raising the reasonable demands of the public at large...
Rajasthan High Court has allowed the State government to withdraw criminal prosecution against four members of the Rajasthan Legislative Assembly and one Ex-MLA, pending before the Ramganj Mandi judicial magistrate for unlawful assembly.
The single-judge bench of Justice Anil Kumar Upman observed that the accused politicians were merely raising the reasonable demands of the public at large during the protest.
Concurring with the submissions made by the Additional Advocate General, the bench sitting at Jaipur inferred that there was no personal interest of the accused respondents involved in the agitation. Earlier, a criminal case was registered against MLAs including Narendra Meghwal, Om Birla, Chandrakanta Meghwal, Bhawani Singh Rajawat and Ex-MLA Anil Jain.
“…The Court has also considered that there are no specific allegations against the petitioners in the chargesheet. Further the possibility that accused respondents were trying to control the agitation cannot be ruled out. All citizens including the respondents are entitled to raise their reasonable demands and for this purpose they can agitate in peaceful manner…”, High Court noted in the order while granting leave to the state to file an application before the trial court for withdrawal of criminal prosecution.
The miscellaneous petition filed by the AAG sought withdrawal of prosecution in criminal case no.896/2018. According to the state, the public agitation in question was in the public interest and intended to seek redressal for various public issues like the condition of roads, electricity, health etc.
The FIR had named 45 known persons and nearly 100 unknown persons out of which only 48 were charge-sheeted for the offences under Sections 143 (unlawful assembly) and 283 I.P.C(danger or obstruction in a public way or line of navigation) and Section 8(B) of National Highway Act (punishment for mischief by injury to national highway). Terming the allegations in the chargesheet as 'omnibus', AAG also argued that the offences under Sections 143 and 243 IPC are of petty nature. Similarly, the offence under Section 8B of the National Highway Act has not been made out against any of the accused, contended the counsel for the state. AAG also placed reliance on Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay v. Union of India and Anr, wherein the apex court held that criminal prosecution against MPs/MLAs can't be withdrawn without the leave of the High Court.
The single-judge bench, after referring to Section 321 CrPC, held that such power and discretion under the section should be exercised with good faith to serve the larger public interest and hence the prosecution may be withdrawn from the trial court in the case at hand.
AAG Ghanshyam Singh Rathore represented the State and Advocate Naman Yadav appeared for the respondents.
Case Title: State Of Rajasthan, Through Government Advocate v. Narendra Meghwal & Ors.
Case No: S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous (Petition) No. 2615/2022
Citation: Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Raj) 5