The Supreme Court on Thursday issued notice on a plea filed by the Union Territory of Chandigarh challenging the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s order quashing criminal proceedings against Punjab Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann.
During the hearing, ASG SV Raju appearing for the Union Territory argued that the High Court had committed a serious error in holding that an unlawful assembly could not exist in the absence of prohibitory orders under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Referring to the impugned judgment, he submitted that the FIR as well as the charge sheet specifically named Bhagwant Mann as a member of the unlawful assembly, which allegedly turned violent and caused injuries to police personnel. Although the injuries were not grievous, offences including assault on public servants had been invoked, and the investigation culminated in the filing of a charge sheet, it was argued. Assailing the High Court’s reasoning, counsel submitted:
“
“The only reason why the learned Judge says no offence is made out… he says there has to be a 144 promulgation for it to be an unlawful assembly. Unheard of-that’s not the requirement of Section 144…Even if he is not involved in overt acts, if you are a member of the unlawful assembly, whatever any member does is attributable to you. It is a defence that I was only a passive person. That defence cannot be considered at this stage.”
Describing the High Court’s reasoning as “absolutely perverse”, ASG urged the Bench to examine the portion of the judgment where it held that, in the absence of an order under Section 144 CrPC, no unlawful assembly could be said to have been constituted.
During the hearing, the Bench of Chief Justice Surya Kant, Justice Joymalya Bagchi and Justice V Mohana observed that the issue appeared to concern the nature of the charges framed, even though the charge sheet referred to offences relating to unlawful assembly. After hearing the submissions, the Supreme Court issued notice on the appeal and sought responses from the respondents.