Showing Protest Is Hallmark Of Democracy; Raising Slogans Itself Not An Offence: Madras High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Agriculturist

The petition before the High Court was filed by the petitioner facing trial in a case registered under Sections 189(2), 226 and 193(1) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023.

The Single Bench of Justice M. Nirmal Kumar held, “It is seen that the petitioner and others followed the rights provided by the Constitution of India and held the protest under the guise of Constitution. A mere reading of the allegations in the final report shows that the allegations are general in nature and no specific allegations are made against the petitioner to attract the said provisions. Raising slogans and showing protest itself would not amount to commission of offence. Showing Protest is the Hallmark of Democracy, which is a fundamental right guaranteed under the Constitution of India.”

Advocate V. Raghavachari represented the Appellant while Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu A. Amarnath represented the Respondent.

Factual Background

The matter revolves around a hunger strike carried on by certain persons including the petitioner who assembled near the Kovilpalayam area. The petitioner is an Agriculturist and an Office Bearer of the Tamil Nadu Farmers Protection Association, a farmers’ welfare organization functioning throughout the State of Tamil Nadu for the protection of farmers’ rights, agricultural lands, water resources, environmental interests and livelihood concerns of the farming community. One M.Easan, Advocate and Farmer Leader, is the founder of the Tamil Nadu Farmers Protection Association. Aggrieved by the repeated registration of criminal cases against the founder of the Association, the members of the public decided to conduct a peaceful hunger strike and protest in order to bring the issue to the attention of the Government, public authorities and the general public.

The protest raised a demand for the withdrawal of criminal cases allegedly registered against Easan and others. It was alleged that the participants conducted the said protest without obtaining permission from the authorities and thereby, caused inconvenience to the public and obstruction to the free movement of the general public. Pursuant to a complaint lodged by the Village Administrative Officer, an FIR was registered by the Avinashipalayam Police Station for the alleged offences under Sections 189(2), 226 and 193(1) of the BNS and the respondent police filed a final report.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the facts of the case, the Bench noted that the petitioner and others conducted a protest which is their fundamental right. It was further noticed that no public lodged a complaint and no public got affected, due to the protest conducted by the petitioner. The Bench noted that the petitioner and others had only raised slogans and shown protest to withdraw the criminal cases registered against M.Easan.

The Bench also found that there was no promulgation of prohibitory orders which was communicated to the public and there was any disobedience by the petitioner. “Further, in consequence to the protest, the prosecution failed to show whether any trouble occurred. The 1st respondent Police failed to follow the guidelines issued by this Court in Jeevanandham (Cited Supra). In several this type of cases, this Court quashed the investigation against the accused on similar ground”, it added.

In light of such facts and circumstances, the Bench held that the continuation of trial for offences under Sections 189(2), 226 and 193(1) of BNS was wholly unsustainable and constituted a clear abuse of the process of law.

Thus, allowing the Criminal Original Petition, the Bench quashed the proceedings against the petitioner.

Cause Title: Krishnamoorthy v. State (Case No.: CRL.O.P.No.15309 of 2026)

Appearance

Appellant: Senior Counsel V. Raghavachari, Advocate S.Ganesh Babu

Respondent: Counsel for Government of Tamil Nadu (Criminal Side) A.Amarnath

Click here to read/download Order