Peaceful Protest Not a Crime: Madras High Court Quashes 2020 FIR Against Hindu Munnani Workers

The Madras High Court, Madurai Bench, recently quashed an FIR registered against members of Hindu Munnani who were booked for allegedly participating in an unlawful protest in 2020, holding that the criminal case was founded on vague allegations and failed to disclose any ingredients of the offences invoked.

The bench of Justice L. Victoria Gowri allowed a petition filed by seven accused seeking to quash the case registered at the K.Pudur Police Station, Madurai.

"Criminal law cannot be invoked on vague and omnibus allegations, particularly when the allegations seek to criminalise peaceful expression. The present FIR appears to have been registered mechanically and without application of mind," the judge held.

The petitioners, arrayed among 85 accused persons in the FIR, had approached the court contending that the police action violated their constitutional right to peaceful assembly. The FIR was registered for offences corresponding to Sections 145, 151 and 283 of the Indian Penal Code, alleging that the petitioners had taken part in a protest organised by their political organisation.

Court noted that the complaint merely recorded their participation in the gathering and did not attribute any specific act of obstruction, nuisance, violence or disturbance to public order.

The petitioners argued that the protest was peaceful and that criminal law cannot be used to penalise expression of opinion in a democratic society. They told the court that while the police allowed a “Religious Harmony Group” to protest at the same venue on the same day, permission was arbitrarily denied to them. This, they said, amounted to hostile discrimination in violation of Article 14 of the Constitution. They further contended that the FIR was a mere mechanical reproduction of allegations without even an attempt to set out how their conduct satisfied the ingredients of the penal provisions invoked.

Opposing the plea, the State submitted that investigation had only begun and the petitioners had an effective remedy to participate in it.

Court, however, rejected this argument after examining the FIR. It held that the document lacked any material showing that the petitioners had engaged in conduct that could constitute an unlawful assembly, a threat of a cognizable offence, or public obstruction which are the requirements central to Sections 145, 151 and 283 IPC.

Justice Gowri underscored that Articles 19(1)(a) and 19(1)(b) guarantee the freedom of speech and peaceful assembly and that these rights can be curtailed only by reasonable restrictions prescribed by law. The Supreme Court, the judge noted, has consistently held that peaceful protest is a protected democratic right and cannot attract criminal liability unless specific acts cross the threshold of a penal offence.

Court also took note of the allegation that police permitted another group to protest while denying similar permission to the petitioners. Such selective permission, the judge observed, “prima facie indicates discriminatory action” offending Article 14.

The absence of any allegation of violence or obstruction, coupled with the discriminatory treatment, led the court to conclude that the FIR had been registered “mechanically and without application of mind".

Finding that continuation of the investigation would amount to abuse of process, court exercised its inherent powers under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (corresponding to Section 482 CrPC) to quash the FIR insofar as the petitioners were concerned. The connected miscellaneous petition was also closed.

Case Title: Kalanithimaran and Others vs. State of Tamil Nadu

Order Date: December 3, 2025

Bench: Justice L. Victoria Gowri