Tenetowl LogoTenetowl
High Court of KeralaSingle JudgeQuashed; proceedings in CC 713/2021 are quashed...

O.M. Shalina vs State of Kerala

Case / Petition Number:CRL.M.C NO. 6723 OF 2023

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court of Kerala
Hon'ble Judges
  • P. V. Kunhikrishnan
Judgment Date
2023-10-30
Court Decision / Holding
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in CC No.713/2021 arising from Crime No.1535/2020 are quashed.
Final Disposition
Quashed; proceedings in CC 713/2021 are quashed and no further action is to be taken against the petitioner in relation to Crime No.1535/2020.

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • O.M. Shalina

Respondents

  • State of Kerala

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • R.V. Sreejith
  • • G. Maheswary
  • • Nidhin Krishna
  • • Anakha Babu

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Hrithwik C.S., Public Prosecutor

Case Synopsis & Summary

This Kerala High Court criminal miscellaneous case arises from CC 713/2021, connected to Crime No.1535/2020 of Ernakulam Central Police Station. The first accused, O.M. Shalina, seeks to invoke the inherent power under Section 482 CrPC to quash the ongoing prosecution arising from alleged offences under IPC Sections 143, 147, 149, 188, 269 and 271, the Kerala Police Act Section 118(e), and Kerala Epidemic Diseases Ordinance, 2020 Sections 4(2)(a), 4(2)(e) and 5. The prosecution asserts that an unlawful assembly formed during a curfew led to the alleged offences. The petitioner contends that even accepting the allegations, no offence is made out and that the protest was a lawful exercise of the right to freedom of assembly under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. The Public Prosecutor cites GO (Rt.) No. 3326/2022/HOME dated 24.11.2022 withdrawing certain Covid-19 protocol violations and notes that the withdrawn cases do not cover all charged sections. The court relies on the principle laid down in Prakash Karat and Others v. State of Kerala and Another (2022 (5) KLT 907) that dissent and protests without violent conduct need not be criminalized, and, in light of that dictum and the GO, exercises its power under 482 CrPC to quash the proceedings. The result is that all further proceedings in CC 713/2021 are quashed.

Provisions of Law Cited

Section 482 of CrPCSections 143, 147, 149, 188, 269, 271 IPCSection 118(e) of the Kerala Police ActSections 4(2)(a), 4(2)(e) and 5 of the Kerala Epidemic Diseases Ordinance, 2020Section 144 Cr.P.CSection 95 IPCG.O.(Rt.) No.3326/2022/HOME

Legal Doctrines & Maxims

  • Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India - Right to freedom of assembly
  • Lawful versus unlawful assembly: protest or assembly without arms/violent intent can be lawful
  • Dissent not to be criminalized solely for being in minority, unless accompanied by violent, disorderly or damaging conduct
  • Section 95 IPC can provide aid in handling trivial or minor incidents

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The petitioner contends that even if the allegations are accepted, no offence is made out and that the protest constituted a lawful assembly under Article 19(1) of the Constitution. She argues the case falls within the bounds of a dissenting expression and does not involve force, arms, or intent to commit a crime. Relying on the Prakash Karat principle, the petitioner seeks quashing of CC 713/2021 under the inherent powers of this Court (Section 482 CrPC), as continuing prosecution would be a disproportionate response to a relatively non-violent protest.

Contentions of Respondents

The State contends that the protest occurred during a curfew, constituting offences under IPC and KDEO. The Government Order GO (Rt.) No. 3326/2022/HOME is cited as a basis for withdrawing certain Covid-19 related cases, though not necessarily this particular offence. The respondents argue that the continuing prosecution may still be warranted unless covered by the withdrawal order, and they emphasize the need to uphold law and order during a public health emergency.

Cited Precedents (1)

Case NameCitationTreatmentExplanation
Prakash Karat and Others v. State of Kerala and Another2022 (5) KLT 907PositiveCourt relied on this decision to support the proposition that a protest or assembly without arms or violent intent can be lawful under Article 19(1) and need not be criminalized for mere dissent.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against O.M. Shalina vs State of Kerala and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

## **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 30[TH] DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 8TH KARTHIKA, 1945** **CRL.MC NO. 6723 OF 2023** **CRIME NO.`1535/2020 OF Ernakulam Central Police Station, Ernakulam AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT CC 713/2021 OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE OF** **FIRST CLASS -II, ERNAKULAM** ## **PETITIONER/1ST ACCUSED:** O.M. SHALINA AGED 48 YEARS W/O M.T. RAMESH, METHETUNDIYIL HOUSE, AYANCHERY P.O, VADAKARA KOZHIKODE, PIN - 673541 BY ADVS. R.V.SREEJITH G.MAHESWARY NIDHIN KRISHNA ANAKHA BABU ## **RESPONDENT/STATE:** STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682031 BY ADV. SRI. HRITHWIK C.S.,PP THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 2 **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------** ## **Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 ---------------------------------------------Dated this the 30[th] day of October, 2023** ## **ORDER** This Criminal Miscellaneous Case is filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for the sake of brevity). 2. Petitioner is the first accused in C.C.No.713/2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Ernakulam arising from Crime No.1535/2020 of Ernakulam Central Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 188, 269 and 271 IPC, Section 118 (e) of the Kerala Police Act and Sections 4(2)(a), 4(2)(e) and 5 of the Kerala Epidemic Diseases Ordinance, 2020. 3. The prosecution case is that the petitioner Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 3 with the knowledge that she was a member of an unlawful assembly, along with some other persons, formed part of a protest march at the time when the curfew was in existence to prevent the spreading of Covid-19. Annexure I is the F.I.R and Annexure II is the final report. According to the petitioner, even if the entire allegations are accepted, no offence is made out. 4. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Public prosecutor. 5. Annexure II is the final report. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of Annexure II: “ വവാളയവാർ പപൺകുടട്ടികളുപടെ കുടടുംബതട്ടിനു നനീതട്ടി നട്ടിഷഷേധട്ടിക്കുന്നതട്ടിപനതട്ടിപരെയടും സസർണ്ണക്കള്ളക്കടെതത്ത് ഷകസട്ടിൽ മുഖഖ്യ മനട്ടി പട്ടിണറവായട്ടി വട്ടിജയൻ രെവാജട്ടിപവക് എന് ആവശഖ്യങ്ങളുമവായട്ടി എറണവാകുളടും ജട്ടിലവാ മഹട്ടിളവാഷമവാർച്ചയപടെ ആഭട്ടിമുഖഖ്യതട്ടിൽ 1 മുതൽ 5 വപരെ കൂടെട്ടിയ പ്രതട്ടികളുപടെ ഷനതൃതസതട്ടിൽ മറ്റു കണവാലറട്ടിയവാവുന്ന പ്രതട്ടികളുടും കൂടെട്ടി നഖ്യവായ വട്ടിഷരെവാധമവായട്ടി സടുംഘടും ഷചർന്നത്ത് തങ്ങൾ ഓഷരെവാരുതരുടും ടെട്ടി Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 4 സടുംഘതട്ടിപല അടുംഗങ്ങളവാപണന്നുള്ള അറട്ടിഷവവാടടും കരുതഷലവാടടും കൂടെട്ടി covid -19 പകവാഷറവാണ വവറസത്ത് പടെരുന്നതത്ത് തടെയന്നതട്ടിനവായട്ടി സടുംഘടും ഷചരുന്നതടും, പപവാതപരെട്ടിപവാടെട്ടികൾ സടുംഘടെട്ടിപട്ടിക്കുന്നതടും അനവാവശഖ്യ യവാത്രകൾ നടെത്തുന്നതടും പവാടെട്ടിപലന്നുള്ളതത്ത് ഗവൺപമനത്ത് നട്ടിർഷദ്ദേശവുടും, ആഷരെവാഗഖ്യ വകുപട്ടിപന മുന്നറട്ടിയട്ടിപടും, ഷകരെള എപട്ടിഡമട്ടികത്ത് ഡട്ടിസനീസസത്ത് ഓർഡട്ടിനൻസത്ത് 2020 ഉടും, 144 Cr.P.C ഉടും നട്ടിലവട്ടിലട്ടിരെട്ടിപക്ക, അതട്ടിനു വട്ടിപരെനീതമവായട്ടി പപവാതജനങ്ങൾക്കട്ിയട്ടിൽ ടെട്ടി സവാടുംക്രമട്ടിക ഷരെവാഗടും വഖ്യവാപട്ടിക്കവാനട്ിയവാകുന്ന സവാഹചരെഖ്യടും സൃഷത്ത്ടെട്ടിക്കുന്ന തരെതട്ടിൽ സവാമൂഹട്ടിക അകലടും പവാലട്ടിക്കവാപത 31/10/2020 തനീയ്യതട്ടി 18.30 മണട്ടിക്കത്ത് എറണവാകുളടും വട്ടിലജത്ത് ടെട്ടി കരെയട്ടിൽ മവാധവ ഫവാർമസട്ടി ജടുംഗ്ഷേനട്ടിൽ പതഷക്കവാടത്ത് കട്ിക്കുന്ന MG ഷറവാഡട്ടിപന തടെക്കതട്ടിൽ പടെട്ടിഞവാറുവശടും നട്ടിൽക്കുന്ന C/MG/1 എന്ന നമർ ഇടട്ിള്ള ഇരുമത്ത് ഇലകട്ടിക്കത്ത് ഷപവാസട്ടിപന ചുവടട്ടിൽ നട്ടിന്നുടും 2 മനീറർ വടെക്കു മവാറട്ടിയടും ടെട്ടി ജടുംഗ്ഷേനട്ടിൽ പതക്കുവശതവായട്ടി സട്ടിതട്ടി പചയ്യുന്ന C/BA/42 -)o നമർ ഇലകട്ടികത്ത് ഷപവാസട്ടിപന ചുവടട്ടിൽ നട്ടിന്നുടും 12 മനീറർ വടെക്കുപടെട്ടിഞവാറു മവാറട്ടിയടും ടെട്ടി ജടുംഗ്ഷേനട്ടിൽ വടെക്കു വശതവായട്ടി സട്ടിതട്ടി പചയ്യുന്ന മവാധവ ഫവാർമസസ്യൂടട്ടിക്കൽ ലഷബവാറടറനീസത്ത് പ്രവർതട്ടിക്കുന്ന ബട്ടിൽഡട്ടിങ്ങട്ടിൽ നട്ടിന്നുടും 5 മനീറർ പതക്കു Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 5 മവാറട്ടിയടും കവാണുന്ന ഷറവാഡട്ടിലടും പരെട്ടിസരെത്തുടും വച്ചത്ത് മുദവാവവാകഖ്യടും വട്ടിളട്ടിച്ചു പ്രതട്ടിഷഷേധ മവാർച്ചത്ത് നടെതട്ടിയതവായട്ടി 4-)o സവാകട്ടിയവാൽ ൾ ഷമൽ ൾ കവാണപപടത്ത് പ്രതട്ടിക വകുപക പ്രകവാരെടും ശട്ടികട്ടിക്കതക്ക കുറടും പചയട്ടിരെട്ടിക്കുന്നു എന്നത്ത് .” 6. The learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the Government as per G.O.(Rt.)No.3326/2022/HOME dated 24.11.2022 decided to withdraw cases which are registered in connection with Covid-19 protocol violation. The Public Prosecutor submitted that, since the offence under Section 143, 147, 149 and 271 are not included as per G.O.(Rt.)No.3326/2022/ HOME, the prosecutor has not filed any application to withdraw the case. But in **Prakash Karat and Others v. State of Kerala and Another** [2022 (5) KLT 907], this Court observed that a protest or an assembly of persons without any criminal force or show of criminal force would not make the assembly unlawful. This Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 6 Court also observed that an assembly of persons without arms or without criminal force or without any intent to commit an offence can only be a lawful assembly, which is not prohibited and such an assembly is a formation in the exercise of the right to freedom of every citizen guaranteed under Article 19(1) of the Constitution of India. It is also observed by this Court that, merely because the dissent is not acceptable to the majority, that is not a reason to initiate criminal action unless the dissent was coupled with violent, disorderly or damaging conduct by any member of the assembly. This Court also observed that, if prosecution is initiated for every such triviality, the system will crumble. It is also observed that Section 95 IPC comes to the aid in such instances. In the light of the dictum laid down by this Court in **Prakash Karat** 's case ( _supra_ ) and also in the light of G.O. (Rt.)No.3326/2022/HOME, I am of the considered Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 7 opinion that the continuation of the prosecution against the petitioner is not necessary. Therefore, this Criminal Miscellaneous Case is allowed. All further proceedings against the petitioner in C.C.No.713/2021 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court II, Ernakulam arising from Crime No.1535/2020 of Ernakulam Central Police Station are quashed. Sd/- DM **P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE** Crl.M.C.No.6723 of 2023 8 ## **APPENDIX OF CRL.MC 6723/2023** PETITIONER ANNEXURES ANNEXURE I THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THAT FIR IN CRIME NO. 1535 OF 2020 OF ERNAKULUM CENTRAL POLICE STATION DATED 31.10.2020 ALONG WITH FIRST INFORMATION STATEMENT ANNEXURE II THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THAT FINAL REPORT FILED BEFORE THE JUDICIAL FIRST CLASS MAGISTRATE COURT-II, ERNAKULAM PENDING AS C.C. NO. 713 OF 2021 ANNEXURE III THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 06.11.2020 IN CRL.M.C. NO. 7029 OF 2018 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT ANNEXURE IV THE TRUE COPY OF THE G.O NO.3326 / 2022/HOME DATED 24.11.2022, RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS :NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE