The Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court gave relief to the 26-year-old man booked for protesting against potholed, crumbling roads in Maharashtra’s Chandrapur district
MUMBAI — It would be a “sad day for democracy” if people were hauled into court simply for taking part in a peaceful protest.
That was the sharp warning from the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court as it quashed criminal proceedings against a 26-year-old man booked for protesting against potholed, crumbling roads in Maharashtra’s Chandrapur district.
In Nishkarsh Kiran Nimgade vs State of Maharashtra, Justice M W Chandwani held that prosecuting the young man amounted to an abuse of the process of law.
“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 remarked on Thursday.
Relying on a Supreme Court ruling, Justice Chandwani observed that criminal prosecutions must not be used to suppress agitations that are part of the democratic process — so long as protesters do not take the law into their own hands, turn violent, or damage public or private property.
The Protest That Sparked the Case
The case traces back to January 21 this year, when a pickup vehicle overturned near Mauza Nandgaon after hitting an electricity pole, injuring several passengers, Bar and Bench reported.
Shaken and angry, local residents gathered at the spot and demanded action against officials of the Public Works Department (PWD) and the contractor responsible for the road. The protesters allegedly also tied a rope across the road.
Police later registered an FIR against Nimgade, invoking provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) relating to wrongful restraint and unlawful assembly, along with provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act, 1951.
What the Court Found
After examining the chargesheet, Justice Chandwani noted a glaring gap: the prosecution had not recorded statements from a single commuter to establish that the road had actually been obstructed.
The court also observed that Nimgade’s name surfaced only after police had dispersed the gathering.
“Merely because a large number of persons gathered to agitate against the condition of the road and (were) insisting (on) action against the erring officials of (the) PWD department and the contractor, it cannot be presumed that the people gathered on the spot formed an unlawful assembly,” the court said in its order.
The High Court further underscored that Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution guarantees citizens the right to assemble peacefully and without arms, stressing that criminal proceedings should not be used to stifle peaceful democratic dissent.
“The launch of criminal prosecution against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of the process of the court,” Justice Chandwani concluded.
The court accordingly quashed the FIR, chargesheet and proceedings pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Mul, insofar as they concerned Nimgade.
