The Delhi High Court quashed an FIR against an SSC aspirant who joined a Ramlila Maidan protest. The ruling underscores that mere presence cannot establish shared criminal intent without specific evidence.Newdelhi,Oct 22, 2026 16:36 ISTThe Delhi High Court has ruled that merely participating in a demonstration does not establish a common intention to disobey police directions or obstruct police personnel, news agency Press Trust of India reported.Justice Sanjeev Narula made the observation while quashing an FIR against a Staff Selection Commission aspirant booked by Delhi Police in 2025 for allegedly failing to leave Ramlila Maidan despite repeated announcements asking protesters to vacate the venue.The petitioner had taken part in a protest at Ramlila Maidan in August last year over alleged irregularities in the conduct of the SSC entrance examination.The prosecution claimed that some organisers refused to end the demonstration after the permitted time had expired and urged the gathering to remain at the venue until their demands were met.
Police registered the FIR alleging that some protesters violated prohibitory orders issued under Section 163 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita by continuing to occupy the ground. It was also alleged that some protesters pushed and scuffled with police personnel.Granting relief to the petitioner, the court said neither the FIR nor the subsequent status report attributed any specific criminal conduct to him, PTI reported.
It held that his presence among the protesters, without evidence of a common intention to commit an offence with others, was not enough to establish an offence under Section 223(a) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita. The provision penalises disobedience of an order lawfully issued by a public servant when the person concerned knows about the order and the disobedience causes, or is likely to cause, obstruction or annoyance to people lawfully employed.“The petitioner cannot be subjected to criminal proceedings merely on account of his presence amongst the protesters, in the absence of material indicating his knowing participation in the alleged disobedience or any common intention to commit the offence.
The continuation of the proceedings against him, in these circumstances, would serve no worthwhile purpose,” the court said in its October 13 order.“Mere participation in the same demonstration does not, by itself, establish a common intention to disobey lawful directions or obstruct police personnel. The material on record does not disclose any basis for attributing such common intention to the petitioner,” it held.The High Court, therefore, quashed the FIR against the SSC aspirant after finding no material linking him personally to the alleged disobedience or obstruction.- Ends