Allahabad High Court Refuses To Quash Chargesheet Against Anti-CAA Protestors Accused Of Pelting Stones At Police Personnel

The Allahabad High Court recently refused to quash the Chargesheet filed against 5 men including an engineer by profession, accusing them of pelting stones at police personnel in Bijnor district during the anti-CAA protests in 2019.

The bench of Justice Samir Jain noted that despite the fact that during the relevant time, section 144 Cr.P.C. had already been invoked in the city, a mob, which allegedly included the applicants, gathered and pelted stones at the police personnel, due to which a constable got injured.

Therefore, the Court held, that since the FIR prima facie disclosed cognizable offences against the applicants, the charge sheet pending against the applicants cannot be quashed.

The case in brief

As per the FIR, on December 16, 2019, a huge mob gathered at a public place to raise agitation against Citizenship Amendment Act (Bill) and when police arrived there and informed them that section 144 Cr.P.C. has already been invoked in the city, therefore, no procession can be commenced, then, instead of dispersal, the mob suddenly started an attack on police and due to their stone pelting, one police personnel, namely, Umesh Kumar sustained injuries.

A Chargesheet in the matter was filed in June 2020 against the applicants under Section 147, 148, 332, 336, 353, 188, 427, 109, 120-B, 153A, 295A IPC and the matter is presently pending in the court of Additional Civil Judge, Senior Division-Ist Bijnor.

Now, the petitioners moved to the High Court seeking to quash the charge sheet applicants arguing that they have been falsely implicated in the matter due to their previous enmity with the local police.

It was next submitted that applicants neither pelted stones nor caused any injury to anyone including any police personnel and that even as per the FIR, the applicants had only gathered at the place of incident as protestors.

It was further submitted that only applicants nos. 1 and 2 were named in the FIR and the names of other applicants were disclosed during the investigation. The counsel further submitted that applicant no. 1 is an Engineer and he never indulged in such anti-social activities and that it is the constitutional right of a citizen to protest and merely being a part of peaceful agitation, one cannot be implicated in any criminal case.

However, the Court did not find it appropriate to quash the charge sheet against the applicants, as it noted that FIR prima facie disclosed cognizable offences against the applicants, and thus, their plea was dismissed.

Case title - Suab And 5 Others v. State of U.P. and Another [APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 23361 of 2022]

Case Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (AB) 426

Click Here To Read/Download Order