The Madras Excessive Courtroom has quashed a felony case registered towards a legislation scholar and others for protesting towards the conduct of a convention for the eradication of Sanatana Dharma. [2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 404]
Justice R Vijayakumar famous that the coed and others had raised their agitation in a peaceable and democratic method and there was no allegation of any harm to public property. Thus, the courtroom held that continuation of felony proceedings can be an abuse of means of legislation.
“The petitioner and others, who belong to a Pupil Affiliation had carried out a protest in entrance of a Convention Corridor, the place a assembly was carried out for eradication of Sanatana Dharma, The petitioner and others have raised their agitation in a peaceable and democratic method and additional, there isn’t any allegation of any harm to any public property. In such circumstances, continuation of the felony proceedings would solely be an abuse of means of legislation,” the courtroom noticed.
The courtroom was listening to a petition filed by Senthoorvelan. Senthoorvelan, together with seven others, had protested towards the conduct of a convention for eradication of Sanatana Dharma. The prosecution alleged that regardless of warnings by police officers, the petitioners and others blocked the highway and prompted inconvenience to most of the people.
The petitioner argued that he had raised his objection with regard to the conduct of the assembly and had peacefully carried out the protest in entrance of the Convention Corridor. The petitioner argued that the identical couldn’t be thought of an offence. The petitioner additionally identified that the chargesheet had not been filed for the previous three years.
The prosecution argued that although the chargesheet was prepared, it had not been filed but.
Noting that the petitioners had carried out their protest peacefully and no public property had been broken, the courtroom was inclined to quash the case. Thus, the courtroom quashed the FIR not solely towards the petitioner scholar however towards all different accused additionally.
Counsel for Petitioner: Mr. PR. Malan
Counsel for Respondent: Mr. G. Ganesh Kumar Authorities Advocate (Crl.Facet)
Case Title: M Senthoorvelan v State of Tamil Nadu and One other
Quotation: 2026 LiveLaw (Mad) 404
Case No: Crl OP (MD) No 16688 of 2026
