They Were Exercising Right To Freedom Of Speech & Expression: Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Telugu Actor Manchu Mohan & Son

The Supreme Court quashed the criminal proceedings against the Telugu actor Manchu Mohan Babu and his son and observed that they were exercising their right to freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peacefully.

An FIR was lodged against the Appellants and other participants invoking Sections 290, 341, 171F read with Section 34 of the IPC and Section 34 of the Police Act as the Appellants congregated together to conduct a rally by raising slogans against the-then Government of Andhra Pradesh for not granting student fee reimbursements.

A Bench of Justice B.V Nagarathna and Justice K.V. Viswanathan observed, "Therefore, even if the case of the respondent-State is accepted at its face value, it cannot be concluded that the appellants, while conducting the rally and dharna, engaged in any form of obstruction of the road in a manner that led to the offences alleged. The appellants were exercising their right to freedom of speech and expression and to assemble peacefully. Therefore, no purpose will be served by continuing the prosecution."

Senior Advocate Raghavendra S. Srivatsa represented the Appellants, while Advocate Prerna Singh represented the Respondents.

Case Brief

The Appellants are father and son. The Father, Manchu Mohan Babu is the Chairman of Sri Vidyaniketan Educational Institutions.

The General Elections for the Lok Sabha and the Legislative Assembly in Andhra Pradesh were scheduled on 11.04.2019 and as a consequence, the Model Code of Conduct came into force on 10.03.2019 restricting public meetings, dharnas, rallies and road shows without prior permission from the Competent Authority until the end of the electoral process.

The State contended that the Appellants and some other staff and students congregated together to conduct a rally by raising slogans against the-then Government of Andhra Pradesh for not granting student fee reimbursements. Such acts were alleged to have caused obstruction to the free flow of traffic, inconvenience, annoyance and risk to passengers. Accordingly, an FIR was lodged against the Appellants and other participants.

Being aggrieved by the said criminal proceedings, the appellants approached the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, however, the same was dismissed as there was no tenable grounds to quash the proceedings.

Court's Observation

The Supreme Court opined that the issue that had to be addressed by the High Court was whether, assuming all the allegations in the FIR and chargesheet are correct as they stand, offences punishable under the aforesaid sections were made out.

Further, the Court observed, “we fail to understand as to how the allegations against the appellants herein could be brought within the scope and ambit of the aforesaid provisions.”

The Court was of the opinion that the crucial ingredients of the offences under Sections 290, 341, 171F read with 34 IPC and Section 34 of the Police Act, 1861 are entirely absent.

“A reading of the FIR and the charge-sheet neither discloses any act committed or illegal commission that caused common injury, danger, annoyance to the public or any section of the public or interference with their public rights, nor do they disclose any voluntary obstruction to a person that prevents them from proceeding in any direction that they have a right to proceed in. Further they do not disclose any material to suggest that there was any undue influence at elections, impersonation at elections or any act committed with the intention to interfere with the free exercise of electoral rights”, the Court said.

Accordingly, the Appeal was allowed by the Supreme Court and the criminal proceedings were quashed.

Cause Title: Manchu Mohan Babu V. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 916)

Click here to read/download Judgment