An assembly lacking an unlawful common object under IPC Section 141 does not attract Section 143.

The petitioner sought to quash Crime No. 2115 of 2020, registered against him under Sections 143 and 269 of the IPC.

The prosecution alleged that he and others unlawfully assembled and staged a protest near the Ambedkar Statue at Kallakurichi, intending to disturb public peace and violate COVID-19 guidelines.

The petitioner denied committing the alleged offences; the State submitted that the investigation was nearly complete and a final report was about to be filed.

1. Whether the allegations and materials disclosed an unlawful assembly so as to make out an offence under Section 143 IPC against the petitioner.

2. Whether the FIR under Sections 143 and 269 IPC should be quashed against the petitioner.

The Court relied on the quashing principles in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, including that proceedings may be quashed where the allegations and supporting material do not disclose an offence.

It also set out Section 141 IPC, under which an assembly of five or more persons is unlawful only when its common object falls within one of the specified categories.

Section 143 IPC criminalises membership of an unlawful assembly.

The petition was brought under Section 528 BNSS, while the Court referred to the inherent-power principles under Section 482 CrPC.

Applying Section 141 IPC, the Court concluded that the alleged assembly did not involve the criminal force or other conduct described in its discussion of that provision.

It therefore held that Section 143 IPC was not attracted against the petitioner.

Although the FIR also invoked Section 269 IPC, the Court did not separately analyse that offence in its reasoning; it nevertheless quashed the FIR under both provisions as against the petitioner.