Chennai: While quashing the proceedings against 92 persons, who were affected by Gaja cyclone, pending before the lower court, for allegedly raising slogans and conducting a Dharna when the state machinery was carrying relief works in Nagapattinam district, the Madras high court has dismissed another petition from 33 persons, which sought to quash an FIR registered against 52 persons for indulging in causing damages to the vehicles including a government bus and attacking police personal during the agitation on November 18, 2018 at Thalainaiyar Village in Nagapattinam district.
Justice N.Anand Venkatesh allowed two writ petitions from 92 persons, which sought to quash the FIRs registered against them while dismissing a petition from 33 persons, which sought to quash the FIR register against them.
Allowing the petitions from Rajendran and 91 others, the judge said, “The entire incident had happened in a spur of the moment, when people were deprived of their basic necessities. This is an extraordinary case where this court cannot deal with this case like a regular routine criminal case. The petitioners had lost their sense of balance and out of desperation they never realized what they were doing. There are no materials to show that there was any pre-meditation or criminal intent in carrying out the protest/dharna. The interest of justice requires interference with the criminal proceedings since making the petitioners face a criminal prosecution for one solitary incident that took place under an extreme situation, will amount to an abuse of process of court. This court has no hesitation to interfere with the proceedings which are the subject matter of these two petitions”, the judge added and quashed the proceedings.
Concurring with the submission of State Public Prosecutor A.Natarajan, the judge while dismissing the petition from 33 persons, who indulged in causing damage to vehicles and attacking police personnel, said if the reaction had stopped with agitations, gheraos or even damage to vehicles, this court would have exercised its jurisdiction to the fullest extent and interfered with the proceedings to do real and substantial justice to the parties.
