Justice N. Sathish Kumar, Madras High Court The Madras High Court has quashed a criminal case against the accused persons booked for installing LED screens to watch the Ram Mandir ceremony

Home / Court Updates / High Courts / Madras High Court Merely Because People Gathered To Watch Religious Function, It Can’t Be Called Unlawful Assembly: Madras High Court Quashes Criminal Case The Madras High Court was considering a Criminal Original Petition seeking to quash the proceedings, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate. ByTulip Kanth|24 Oct 2025 12:20 PM Justice N. Sathish Kumar, Madras High Court The Madras High Court has quashed a criminal case against the accused persons booked for installing LED screens to watch the Ram Mandir ceremony live. The High Court held that merely because some people gathered to watch the said function, it cannot be said to be an unlawful assembly. The High Court was considering a Criminal Original Petition seeking to quash the proceedings, pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate. The Single Bench of Justice N. Sathish Kumar observed, “Therefore, merely because some people gathered to watch said functions, it cannot be said as an unlawful assembly so as to attract the aforesaid offence. Further, there was no public nuisance. Hence, merely on the basis of the complaint lodged by an individual, the prosecution cannot be sustained for the aforesaid reasons.” Also Read – Authorities Under JJ Act Obliged To Speed Up: Madras High Court Flags Prolonged Delays In Processing Adoption Applications Advocate B.Sruthi represented the Petitioners while Public Prosecutor R.Vinothraja represented the Respondent. Factual Background The complainant alleged that by installing the LED screen in front of the Kamarajapuram Ram Temple Bhajanai Math to telecast the live of the Ayodhya Ram Mandir ceremony, the accused caused a traffic jam and disturbance to the public. A criminal case was registered for the offence under Sections 143, 341 and 290 IPC. After completion of the investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the petitioners, and the Magistrate took cognizance of the same. Reasoning The Bench took note of the allegations that the petitioners had installed the LED screen in a public place and thereby committed the aforesaid offence. The Bench observed that whenever functions relating to different religions are conducted, there may be certain groups having grievances. Also Read – Adopted Child Has Equal Status As Biological Child; JJ Act Prevails Over Muslim Personal Law: Madras High Court The Bench explained that while exercising the power under Section 482 Cr.P.C (corresponding to Section 528 BNSS), the Court should be slow. At the same time, if the Court finds that the entire materials collected by the prosecution, taken as a whole, would not constitute any offence, in such a situation, directing the parties to undergo the ordeal of trial would be a futile exercise and would infringe the right of the persons concerned. The materials collected by the prosecution did not show that the accused had shown any criminal force to commit any mischief, crime or any offence or by way of criminal force, tried to take possession of the property or exercised any incorporeal right in the possession or enjoyment of others. Also Read – Favouritism In Public Employment Undermines Fairness: Madras High Court Orders Appointment Of Candidate Wrongly Denied BT Assistant Post “Considering the above facts, this Court is of the view that the mere launching of an FIR by the prosecution itself is not sufficient to reach to the conclusion that the offences are made out. The materials collected by the prosecution do not support the case, therefore, continuing the prosecution on such shaky grounds or without any materials would amount to a clear abuse of the process of law”, it held. Allowing the criminal petition, the Bench quashed the proceedings against the Petitioners. Cause Title: Sureshbabu v. The State (Case No.: Crl.O.P.No.27515 of 2025) Appearance Petitioner: Advocates B.Sruthi, A.Jagadeeswari Respondent: Public Prosecutor R.Vinothraja Click here to read/download Order Madras HCJustice N. Satish Kumar Tulip Kanth Assistant Editor Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University. SIMILAR POSTS Madras High Court Authorities Under JJ Act Obliged To Speed Up: Madras High Court Flags Prolonged Delays In Processing… Madras High Court Adopted Child Has Equal Status As Biological Child; JJ Act Prevails Over Muslim Personal Law: Madras… Madras High Court Favouritism In Public Employment Undermines Fairness: Madras High Court Orders Appointment Of… Madras High Court Madras High Court Seeks State’s Response On Plea Seeking Publication Of Data Relating To Temples On… About Verdictum About Us Our Team Privacy Policy Terms of Use Contact Us Write for Us Social Media Find Lawyer Advertise with Us Newsletter Archive Sitemap © Copyright 2025Powered by Hocalwire