Bombay HC quashes case against man who protested poor road conditions in Maharashtra

The Bombay High Court’s Nagpur Bench has quashed criminal proceedings against a 26-year-old man accused of participating in a protest over poor road conditions in Maharashtra’s Chandrapur district, observing that peaceful civic demonstrations cannot be treated as criminal acts without evidence of violence or unlawful restraint.

In its October 29 order in Nishkarsh Kiran Nimgade v. State of Maharashtra, Justice MW Chandwani held that criminal prosecution must not be used to suppress the constitutional right to peaceful protest. The court also warned against blurring the distinction between legitimate democratic demonstrations and punishable offences.

“The lines between the constitutional right to protest and the unleashing of penal prosecutions cannot be allowed to be blurred. If this mindset gains traction, it would be a sad day for democracy,” the court observed.

Protest followed accident on poor road

The case arose from an incident on January 21 this year, when a pickup vehicle overturned near Mauza Nandgaon after hitting an electricity pole. Several passengers were injured in the accident.

Following the incident, local residents gathered at the spot to demand action against officials of the Public Works Department (PWD) and the contractor responsible for the road. The protesters allegedly tied a rope across the road.

Police subsequently registered an FIR against Nimgade, accusing him of wrongful restraint and unlawful assembly under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), along with offences under other provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.

Court finds no evidence of unlawful assembly

After examining the charge-sheet, Justice Chandwani noted that the prosecution had not recorded statements from any commuters to establish that traffic had actually been obstructed. The court also observed that Nimgade's name emerged only after the police had dispersed the gathering.

The judge said the mere presence of a large number of people at the site, protesting against the road's condition and demanding action against the responsible PWD officials and contractor, was not sufficient to conclude that they had formed an unlawful assembly.

“Merely because a large number of persons gathered to agitate against the condition of the road and insisting for action against the erring officials of PWD department and the contractor, it cannot be presumed that the people gathered on the spot formed an unlawful assembly,” the order stated.

The court further highlighted that Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to assemble peacefully and without arms. It stressed that criminal proceedings should not be allowed to discourage or suppress non-violent democratic protests.

FIR and charge-sheet quashed

Holding that the prosecution against Nimgade amounted to an abuse of the judicial process, Justice Chandwani quashed the FIR and the charge-sheet under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).

“The launch of criminal prosecution against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of the process of the Court,” the judge concluded.

Advocates Purushottam Patil, NA Waghmare, Vinay Rathi and Yash Ghodichor appeared on behalf of Nimgade. Additional Public Prosecutor HD Futane represented the State of Maharashtra.