Read Time: 04 minutes
The individuals were booked for flying drones during PM Modi’s visit. It was contended by the petitioner that there was no evidence to show that the alleged prohibitory order was properly promulgated as prescribed by Section 163 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
A division bench of the Bombay High Court, led by Justice Nitin W Sambre and Justice RN Laddha, recently quashed the FIR and chargesheet against two individuals who were booked for flying drones during Prime Minister Narendra Modi's visit to Mumbai in June 2022.
In a case before the high court, the petitioners, who were employees of a company, had been flying drones between Pedder Road and the Russian Cultural Centre on 12 and 13 June 2022. The drones were being flown in accordance with the permission granted by the Police.
The Prime Minister’s visit was scheduled for June 14th,2022 owing to which VVIP movement was anticipated on Pedder Road and, therefore, restrictions were imposed on using the drone.
On June 13th, 2022, while patrolling within the vicinity of Pedder Road and the Russian Cultural Centre the first informant noticed a drone in the air and upon investigation, discovered that it had been flown in violation of the permission granted.
Therefore, the individuals were booked under Maharashtra Police Act. Subsequently, the magistrate issued process against the petitioners.
The court was appraised that on June 3, 2022, DCP (Operations) issued an order under section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, restricting drone flying activities from June 11, 2022, to July 10, 2022. However, permission was granted for the picturisation of the company’s project development work through a drone in a letter dated June 11, 2022.
Senior Advocate Girish Kulkarni appearing for the petitioner contended that the police authority was aware of the alleged order issued under section 144 of Cr.P.C. when granting permission. However, there is no mention of any such order in the permission letter dated June 11, 2022.
Furthermore, he submitted that there was no evidence to show that the alleged prohibitory order was properly promulgated as prescribed by Section 163 of the Maharashtra Police Act.
The high court accepted the contentions of Kulkarni and quashed the FIR and chargesheet filed against two individuals.
Case title: Mr Tirthankar Suvankar Ganguly & Anr vs State of Maharashtra
Please Login or Register
