Madras High Court Stays Criminal Proceedings Against General Secretary Of TVK Political Party For Alleged Unlawful Assembly

Justice Sunder Mohan ordered an interim stay in a petition filed by N Anand alias Bussy Anand, seeking to quash the FIR registered against him by the Inspector of Police, Airport Police Station, Trichy.

On September 9, Anand and five others were booked in Trichy. The case was that when Anand came to Trichy to seek police permission for TVK's proposed election campaign, he had taken the request letter to the nearby Vinayagar Temple. The party functionaries, who accompanied him parked their cars on the road leading to the airport, allegedly causing a traffic disruption.

It was alleged that when the traffic worsened, the police came to the scene and asked the party functionaries to clear the vehicles, leading to an altercation between the party functionaries and the police. This led to registration of FIR against the party functionaries under Section 189(2) [unlawful assembly], 132 [assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of duty], 126 [criminal restraint], and 285 [danger or obstruction in public way or line of navigation] of the BNS.

In the petition seeking to quash the FIR, Anand submitted that his plane had landed in Trichy only at 10:40 am on 6^th September 2025, and after around 15 minutes for the deportation of passengers and baggage clearance, it would have taken him a minimum of 30 minutes to get out of the airport. He thus said that it would not have been possible for him to reach the nearby Vinayagar temple at 11:00 am as alleged in the FIR.

Anand submitted that it only took him around 5 minutes to go to the Vinayagar temple and pray whereas the police had alleged that the quarrel took place for almost 30 minutes, which was inherently improbable and unbelievable.

It was also submitted that the allegations in the FIR were vague and would not constitute the offences as alleged. It was thus claimed that the FIR was registered purposely to harass him and to obstruct the duties and to deprive him of their political propaganda. He thus claimed that the complaint was actuated by malice and sought to quash the FIR.

Counsel for the Petitioner: Mr. Issac Mohanlal, Senior Advocate for Mr Arivalagan, Mr S Ramasamy, Mr. R Pandi P, Ms. Indira RS

Case Title: N Anand Bussi Anand v. The State of Tamil Nadu and Another

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Mad) 307

Case No: Crl OP (MD) 15172 of 2025