The Punjab and Haryana High Court has quashed the FIR and all related criminal proceedings against several leaders of Aam Aadmi Party, including Bhagwant Mann, in connection with a 2020 protest in Chandigarh. The case arose after AAP organised a demonstration against a hike in electricity tariffs. On January 10, 2020, AAP workers — reportedly between 750 and 800 protesters — marched towards the then Chief Minister’s official residence, pressing their demand to submit a memorandum opposing the tariff hike. When police attempted to stop them, they used water cannon and barricades; what followed was described in the FIR as sudden stone-pelting by some protestors, leading to injuries among certain police personnel. The FIR named Mann and other party legislators, along with a large number of unnamed supporters, charging them under various sections of the Indian Penal Code including those related to rioting, unlawful assembly, voluntarily causing hurt and using criminal force to deter a public servant from duty.
In its decision, the High Court bench underscored the absence of any prohibitory order under Section 144 of the CrPC, which would have made the assembly unlawful — a crucial precondition for the offences invoked. The chargesheet failed to identify any specific individual, among the accused leaders or the crowd, as responsible for the stone-pelting. No overt act, instigation, distinct words or gestures were attributed to the petitioners individually. The court noted there was no allegation that the leaders asked anyone to throw stones, or that any stick, stone or weapon was carried by protesters under their direction. In light of these omissions, the essential ingredients required to sustain offences such as rioting and unlawful assembly, or assault on public servants, were absent.
As for the injuries suffered by police personnel, the court found they amounted to abrasions, swelling and pain — injuries consistent with pushing and jostling by a crowd trying to break through barricades, rather than deliberate assault or use of criminal force. This further undermined the case for offences under the sections invoked. The High Court observed that the violence — if any — erupted only after police resorted to firing water cannon on the assembled crowd, on the orders of the duty magistrate. In that context, holding the leaders criminally liable for the crowd’s reaction was not justifiable.
Consequently, the court held that there was no prima facie case against the petitioners. It granted the petitions seeking quashing of the FIR, chargesheet and all subsequent proceedings in the matter. The court’s order clears the way for the accused leaders to no longer face trial in connection with this protest.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.