The Bombay High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against a man who allegedly participated in a protest over the poor condition of a road in Chandrapur, observing that peaceful demonstrations are part of the democratic process and cannot be suppressed through criminal prosecution without sufficient legal grounds.
Justice M.W. Chandwani held that merely gathering to demand action against officials and contractors responsible for road maintenance does not automatically constitute an unlawful assembly under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS).
Background
The matter arose from an accident on January 21, 2026, when a pickup vehicle overturned after hitting an electricity pole near Nandgaon village in Chandrapur district. Several passengers sustained injuries, including one person who suffered serious injuries.
Following the incident, local residents gathered to protest against the condition of the road and demanded action against the concerned Public Works Department (PWD) officials and contractor. Police alleged that protesters attempted to block traffic by tying a rope across the road.
An FIR was registered against Nishkarsh Nimgade and others. The police invoked Sections 126(2), 189(2), 190 and 191(2) of the BNS, along with provisions of the Maharashtra Police Act and Criminal (Amendment) Act. Nimgade subsequently approached the High Court under Section 528 of the BNSS seeking quashing of the FIR and subsequent proceedings.
Justice Chandwani examined the charge-sheet and found that it did not identify any commuter who had allegedly been prevented from using the road. No statement from an affected passerby had been recorded. The Court also noted that Nimgade's name did not appear in the part of the FIR describing the alleged obstruction.
The Court observed:
"It is a settled law that prosecutions must not be launched to stifle agitations that are part of democratic process so long as the people do not take the law into their own hands or indulge in violence or damage to public or private property. Article 19(1)(b) of the Constitution guarantees the right to assemble peaceably and without arms."
It further emphasised:
"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 Bench also found no material establishing that a prohibitory order under Section 37 of the Maharashtra Police Act had been issued and duly publicised. It held that the ingredients of the offences invoked against the applicant were not established.
Allowing the application, the Bombay High Court quashed FIR No. 44/2026, the subsequent charge-sheet and Regular Criminal Case No. 432 of 2026 pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mul, insofar as Nishkarsh Nimgade was concerned.
The Court held that continuing the criminal prosecution against him would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
Case Details
Case Title: Nishkarsh S/o Kiran Nimgade v. State of Maharashtra
Case Number: Criminal Application (APL) No. 1699 of 2026
Judge: Justice M.W. Chandwani
Decision Date: October 29, 2026
