Sekarreporter1: [4/16, 11:30] Judge Suthantheram: Mr.Justice Anand Venkatesh quashed an FIR invoking exception under section 95 IPC as the offence being trivial in nature. While practicing as advocate for a case before a Magistrate I searched for precedents. Only a very few cases were available.

[4/17, 12:16] Sekarreporter1: [4/16, 11:30] Judge Suthantheram: Mr.Justice Anand Venkatesh quashed an FIR invoking exception under section 95 IPC as the offence being trivial in nature.
While practicing as advocate for a case before a Magistrate I searched for precedents. Only a very few cases were available.
I am happy that section 95 has come to the mind of Judge, but my question is whether it is applied in right case.
In many matters people oppose decisions and activities of Govt. Public sectors etc. May be genuine and reasonable and may agitate. While so taking law in to their hands as unlawful assembly indulging in violence like pelting stones, can it be considered as slight harm and no one will complaint about it.
That too quashing at the stage of FIR sets a bad precedent giving clean chit to an act of violence by a mob even though grievance is genuine.
Ofcourse, it is for Govt. and Public Prosecutor to decide on this issue.
(Sudanthiram )
[4/16, 11:34] Sekarreporter1: ☘️☘️
[4/17, 12:16] Sekarreporter1: [4/17, 10:23] Judge Suthantheram: It cannot be stated that the invocation of the exception of S.95 IPC in the instant case by NAVJ is wrong. The learned Judge had taken into consideration of the facts and circumstances of the instant case. It is needless to state that women are the worst affected section of the community due to the opening of the TASMAC shops in many objectionable places .Naturally the ladies have been provoked and protested which resulted in the occurence. The incident does not resulted in any serious law and order problem. No one from the locality preferred complaint.Only the salesman of the TASMAC had given complaint with exaggerated version resulting in the registration of the case. Rendering Justice is more important in a given case.The learned judge rightly invoked the provision u/s 95 IPC.The apprehension of TSJ ofcourse reasonable but the learned Judge had taken a correct view on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the instant case by invoking S 95 IPC.
[4/17, 10:23] Judge Suthantheram: This opinion by Justce K. N. Basha
[4/17, 10:25] Sekarreporter1:

You may also like...