Madras High Court Quashes Case Against Dravidar Kazhagam Members For Protesting Against Hindi Imposition In 2022

Justice GK Ilanthiraiyan quashed the FIR filed against Vice President Poongundran, General Secretary Anburaj, and Treasurer Kumaresan. They were booked by the Egmore Police for offences under Section 143(Punishment for member of unlawful assembly), 188(Disobedience to order duly promulgated by public servant) of the IPC read with Section 41 of the Tamil Nadu City Police Act for unlawful assembly and for disobeying the order promulgated by a public servant.

The prosecution case was that on April 30, 2022, when the Sub Inspector of Police at Egmore Police Station was conducting routine patrolling near the Railway station, more than 400 persons belonging to Dravidar Kazhagam were found protesting against Hindi Imposition bearing placards and raising slogans. Though the official asked them not to conduct a demonstration without prior permission, the group did not stop and continued to raise slogans. Hence, the Inspector filed a complaint, investigated the same and filed a chargesheet.

Seeking to quash the chargesheet, the petitioners argued that their organisation, founded by EV Ramaswamy, was a disciplined non-political party. It was submitted that they were conducting the demonstration in a peaceful manner without causing any disturbance to the general public or obstructing the vehicles on the road. It was also submitted that the organisation had sought permission from the Commissioner of Police for conducting the demonstration and the same was not rejected.

Questioning the procedure adopted by the Inspector, it was argued that the complainant himself investigating the case and filing a chargesheet was impermissible in law. The petitioners further argued that the chargesheet did not disclose a prima facie case and there was no material to support or substantiate the offence.

The petitioners also submitted that the Magistrate ought not to have taken cognizance of the chargesheet filed for an offence under Section 188 of the IPC without following the procedure under Section 195(i)(a) of CrPC ie, except on a written complaint by the public servant.

It was further submitted that the right to protest in a peaceful manner was permitted in a democratic country and thus the continuation of the criminal proceedings was an abuse of process of law. The petitioners thus contended that the chargesheet was arbitrary, illegal and not sustainable under law and was liable to be rejected.

The court, on hearing the parties, was inclined to quash the proceedings and ordered accordingly.

The petitioners were represented by Advocate D Veerasekaran, Advocate V Prabhakaran, Advocate T Pradeep Raja, and Advocate S Suresh

Case Title: Poongundran and Others v. The State and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 72

Case No: Crl OP 5047 of 2025