Madras High Court Quashes Unlawful Assembly Case Against Men Who Gathered To Watch Live Telecast Of Ram Temple Consecration

Justice N Satish Kumar noted that whenever some religious functions are conducted, there would be some grievances by other groups. The court added that merely because the people had gathered to watch the function, it could not be said to be an unlawful assembly to attract the offences under the IPC.

“Now, it is the case of the prosecution that the petitioners had installed the LED screen in a public place and thereby committed the aforesaid offence. It is a matter of common knowledge that whenever functions relating to different religions are conducted, there may be certain groups having grievances. Therefore, merely because some people gathered to watch said functions, it cannot be said as an unlawful assembly so as to attract the aforesaid offence. Further, there was no public nuisance. Hence, merely on the basis of the complaint lodged by an individual, the prosecution cannot be sustained for the aforesaid reasons,” the court said.

The prosecution's case was based on the complaint of one Nagarajan, who alleged that the accused persons had installed LED screen in front of the Kamarajapuram Ram Temple Bhajanai Math, causing a traffic jam and causing disturbance to the public. Based on the complaint, a case was registered for offences under Sections 143, 341, and 290 of the IPC. The chargesheet was filed and the Judicial Magistrate took cognisance of the same.

Seeking to quash the proceedings, the petitioner submitted that there was no specific allegation against them and that no materials were available to substantiate the prosecution case. it was submitted that the prosecution was initiated on false allegations and even if they were taken on face value, the same would not constitute any offence.

The petitioners further pointed out that the LED screen was not placed on the public road but only in front of the temple, complying with the orders of the High Court. Thus, the petitioners argued that continuing the proceedings would be nothing but an abuse of the process of the court.

The court agreed and noted that the materials collected by the prosecution did not show any criminal force by the accused to commit any mischief, crime or any offence or by way of criminal force. The court added that even as per the FIR, it had not been alleged that the accused assembled unlawfully and used force or violence.

The court remarked that the mere launching of the FIR was not sufficient to conclude that the offences had been made out. The court also observed that continuing the prosecution on shaky grounds or without materials would amount to abuse of process of law.

“Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that the mere launching of an FIR by the prosecution itself is not sufficient to reach to the conclusion that the offences are made out. The materials collected by the prosecution do not support the case, therefore, continuing the prosecution on such shaky grounds or without any materials would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law,” the court said.

The court thus allowed the plea and quashed the proceeding before the Judicial Magistrate.

Counsel for Petitioner: Ms. B. Sruthi for Ms. A. Jagadeeswari

Counsel for Respondents: Mr. R. Vinothraja Public Prosecutor (Coimbatore City)

Case Title: Sureshbabu and Others v State

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 369

Case No: Crl.O.P.No.27515 of 2025