New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR lodged against an advocate who had been booked during the COVID-19 lockdown for allegedly stepping outside his residence without a mask.
Holding that continuing the proceedings would be “oppressive” and an abuse of process, a single-judge Bench of Justice Sanjeev Narula quashed the FIR registered at Vasant Kunj (South-West) police station under Section 188 IPC in 2020 for alleged violation of a Section 144 CrPC order mandating face masks in public.
The trial court had earlier dropped the charge under Section 269 IPC after finding “absence of any material indicating that the Petitioner was COVID-positive”.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that the FIR had “no lawful foundation”, emphasising that he had merely stepped out to the gate of his residence.
He added that “during the early phase of the pandemic, advisories were fluid and overlapping, and a brief presence at one’s gate without a mask could not reasonably be treated as disobedience of an order under Section 144 of CrPC.”
It was further contended that the complaint under Section 195 CrPC did not disclose the order allegedly violated or any material showing that the petitioner was aware of it.
Opposing the plea, the Delhi Police argued that the April 15, 2020 mask order was “duly promulgated, widely publicised, and in force”, asserting that as a practising advocate, the petitioner “ought to have been aware” of it.
It added that his presence outside the residence without a mask amounted to disobedience of a lawful order. In its order, Justice Narula held that the record failed to disclose the statutory ingredients necessary to sustain a charge under Section 188 IPC, noting that the petitioner was not part of any gathering or situation posing public risk.
“The provision is not meant to punish every technical deviation but conduct that obstructs authority or endangers public order or safety,” the Delhi High Court observed, adding that the alleged act fell on the “margins of the mischief sought to be addressed”.
Calling the continuation of proceedings “disproportionate”, Justice Narula said it “would be oppressive and would not advance public health objectives”.
During the hearing, the petitioner volunteered to deposit Rs 10,000 with the Delhi Police Welfare Fund “as a gesture of civic responsibility, without admission of guilt”.
The Delhi High Court accepted the statement and directed that the deposit be made within four weeks.
Allowing the petition, the Delhi HC ordered: “The impugned FIR No. 0150/2020 at P.S. Vasant Kunj (South-West) and all consequential proceedings are quashed.”
Clarifying that its ruling should not be seen as weakening enforcement powers, it added: “Nothing in this order should be read as diluting the authority of the State to enforce lawful public-health directions in appropriate cases.”