VoxJuris
Home › High Courts › Madras High Court 2026 › High Court of Madras

Bellan v. State Rep. by the Inspector of Police

ALLOWED
Court
High Court of Madras
Decided
17 February 2026
Bench
A.D.Jagadish Chandiraauthor
Case no.
CRL OP 3838/2026

Judgment

O RDER

The present Criminal Original Petition has been filed seeking to quash S.T.C.No. 10 of 2026 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate Court, Coonoor.

¶2The brief facts of the case are that on 16.10.2025, the petitioner and others, had unlawfully assembled, without obtaining any permission, and conducted a protest and obstructed a Government bus plying between Adikaratti and Muttinadu, thereby causing disturbance to the public. Therefore, a case in Crime No.40 of 2025 was registered by the respondent police for the offences under Sections 189(2), and 126(2) IPC. After completion of investigation, the respondent police filed the charge sheet before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Coonoor. Pursuant thereto, the learned Magistrate issued summons to the petitioners in S.T.C.No.10 of 2026, which is now sought to be quashed.

¶3Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the instant case are similar to the facts of the cases in Jeevanandham and others vs. The Inspector of Police, Velayuthampalayam Police Station, Karur District reported in (2018 2 LW (Crl) 606) and Sri Raja vs Inspector of Police, Sivakasi Town Police Station Virudhunagar District and others (Crl.O.P No.7922 of 2019, decided on 30.08.2019), in which the proceedings were quashed. Hence, he prayed to quash the summons issued on the petitioners.

¶4Learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) appearing for the respondent police submitted that the present case was registered due to the protest conducted without obtaining any permission. He also endorsed the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the facts of the instant case are akin to the facts in the aforesaid two cases.

¶5Having heard the learned counsel appearing on either side and upon perusal of the entire materials available on record, this Court is of the opinion that the above said decisions would apply on all fours to the present case and that no useful purpose will be served by keeping the impugned proceedings pending and the same is liable to be quashed.

¶6Accordingly, this Criminal Original Petition stands allowed and the proceedings in S.T.C.No. 10 of 2026, on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Coonoor is hereby quashed as against the petitioners. Consequently, the connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.

17.02.2026 Index : Yes/No Speaking/Non Speaking order rpl To

1.The Judicial Magistrate, Coonoor.

2.The Inspector of Police Lovedale Police Station, The Nilgiris.

¶3The Public Prosecutor, High Court of Madras, Chennai.

A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA . J, rpl

17.02.2026

Case details

Parties and counsel

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 17.02.2026 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.D.JAGADISH CHANDIRA and Crl.M.P.Nos.2656 & 2657 of 2026 1.Bellan 2.Haldorai 3.Kumar 4.Balan 5.Srinivasan …. Petitioners Vs 1.State Rep. by The Inspector of Police Lovedale Police Station, The Nilgiris. 2.Rameshponnan Special Sub Inspector of Police, Lovedale Police Station, The Nilgiris. …. Respondents Prayer : Criminal Original Petition filed under Section 528 of B.N.S.S, to call for the records in S.T.C.No. 10 of 2026 pending on the file of the Judicial Magistrate, Coonoor and to quash the same as far as the petitioners are concerned. For Petitioners : Mr.K.Balasubramaniam For R1 : Mr.S.Santhosh Government Advocate (Crl.Side)

Source: High Court of Madras, through the eCourts High Court services, via the Indian High Court Judgments open dataset by Dattam Labs (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.