| |
CDJ 2026 MHC 3619
|
| Court : High Court of Judicature at Madras |
| Case No : CRL. O.P. No. 10161 of 2026 & CRL. M.P. No. 7240 of 2026 |
| Judges: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D. JAGADISH CHANDIRA |
| Parties : Dr. Thol. Thirumavalavan Versus State Rep. by, The Inspector of Police, Odiansalai Police Station, Puducherry & Another |
| Appearing Advocates : For the Petitioner: S. Deepika, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, M.V. Ramachandra Murthy, Public Prosecutor Assisted by Thamizhmani, Advocate. |
| Date of Judgment : 29-04-2026 |
| Head Note :- |
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita - Section 528 -
Comparative Citation:
2026 (1) LW(Crl) 764,
|
| Summary :- |
1. Statutes / Acts / Rules / Orders / Regulations, and Sections Mentioned:
- Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
- Section 482 Cr.P.C.
- Section 153B of IPC
- Section 295A of IPC
- Section 298 of IPC
- Section 504 of IPC
- Section 468(2)(c) of Cr.P.C.
- Section 196(1A) of Cr.P.C.
2. Catch Words:
- limitation
- quashment
- sanction
- hate speech
- religious feelings
3. Summary:
The petition under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita and Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeks to quash the final report in C.C.No.1571 of 2025 filed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Puducherry. The complaint alleges that the petitioner, a Member of Parliament, delivered a hate speech on 09.11.2019, leading to registration of offences under Sections 153B, 295A, 298 and 504 IPC. The investigation culminated in a final report filed on 30.10.2025, exceeding the three‑year limitation prescribed by Section 468(2)(c) Cr.P.C. No prior sanction under Section 196(1A) Cr.P.C. was obtained. The learned public prosecutor admitted the delay. On these grounds, the court found the proceedings liable to be quashed. Consequently, the criminal original petition was allowed, and the related miscellaneous petition was closed.
4. Conclusion:
Petition Allowed |
| Judgment :- |
|
(Prayer: Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita/Section 482 Cr.P.C., to call for entire records in connection with the Final report in C.C.No.1571 of 2025, pending on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Puducherry and quash the same.)
1. This criminal original petition has been filed seeking quashment of the Final report in C.C.No.1571 of 2025, pending on the file of the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Puducherry.
2. Based on the complaint lodged by the 2nd respondent alleging that on 09.11.2019 at 21.00 hrs, the petitioner, being a Member of Parliament, delivered a hate speech with deliberate and malicious intent of outraging the religious feelings of Hindus in a meeting held at Kamban Kaviyarangam at Puducherry, a case in Crime No.743 of 2019 came to be registered by the Perambalur Police Station for the offences under Section 153B, 295A, 298 and 504 of IPC and the same was later transferred to the file of the 1st respondent police for want of jurisdiction and the same was re numbered as Crime No.34 of 2020. Upon completion of the investigation, the final report came to be filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate Court, Puducherry for the abovesaid offences and the same was taken on file in C.C.No.1571 of 2025, which is now sought to be quashed.
3. The maximum punishments prescribed for the aforesaid offences are tabulated hereunder:
Sections
| Punishment
| 153B of IPC
| Imprisonment may extend to three years, or with fine or with both
| 295A of IPC
| Imprisonment may extend to three years, or with fine or with both
| 298 of IPC
| Imprisonment may extend to one year, or with fine or with both
| 504 of IPC
| Imprisonment may extend to two years, or with fine or with both
|
4. For the punishments set out at paragraph 3, supra, the final report ought to have been filed within three years from the date of registration of the FIR, as per Section 468(2)(c) of Cr.P.C. However, in the instant case, the final report has not been filed within three years from the date of registration of FIR and the same has been filed only on 30.10.2025. This position is admitted by the learned Public Prosecutor (Puducherry) appearing for the 1st respondent as well. Further, no prior sanction as mandated under Section 196(1A) of Cr.P.C. has been obtained before filing the present case against the petitioner.
5. Ergo, on the aforesaid grounds, the impugned proceedings is liable to be quashed and it is accordingly quashed in its entirety.
6. As a sequel, this criminal original petition stands allowed. Connected criminal miscellaneous petition is closed.
|
| |
