Madras High Court Refuses To Quash FIR Against ABVP Activists For Protesting Outside CM Stalin's Residence

Update: 2022-09-15 12:15 GMT
story

The Madras High Court on Thursday refused to quash the FIR registered against 31 students belonging to the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) for protesting near Chief Minister MK Stalin's residence. The case of prosecution is that the students had attempted to siege the house of the Chief Minister. When police party attempted to stop them, they pushed the police, tore their uniform...

Your free access to Live Law has expired
Please Subscribe for unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments, Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.

The Madras High Court on Thursday refused to quash the FIR registered against 31 students belonging to the Akhil Bharatiya Vidyarthi Parishad (ABVP) for protesting near Chief Minister MK Stalin's residence.

The case of prosecution is that the students had attempted to siege the house of the Chief Minister. When police party attempted to stop them, they pushed the police, tore their uniform and also broke the barricades. They also damaged the rear view mirror and the indicator light of the police jeep, it is alleged. The students then shouted slogans seeking justice for a student who died by suicide due to forceful conversion.

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan observed that such protests near high security places could not be allowed.

The students, while seeking for quashing the FIRs, contended that no offence could be made out under any penal law for exercising their fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) of the Constitution.

The petitioners contended that they were only exercising their fundamental freedom of expression and that they did not have any intention to commit any offence. They also submitted that they were unarmed and only gathered to draw the attention of the CM. The petitioners had also contended that the offences under Section 153 (A), 143 or 147 would not be made out.

Case Title: S Kaushik and others v. State

Case No: Crl OP 19887 of 2022

Tags:    

Similar News