Delhi High Court Quashes FIR Against Advocate for Not Wearing Mask During COVID-19 Lockdown

Court deems proceedings under IPC Section 188 as oppressive and disproportionate, emphasizing abuse of process in technical deviations.

In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has quashed an FIR against Bhupinder Lakra, an advocate, who was charged with disobedience of a lawful order under Section 188 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) for allegedly not wearing a mask outside his residence during the COVID-19 lockdown. The judgment was delivered by Justice Sanjeev Narula, who emphasized that the continuation of proceedings would be oppressive and an abuse of process, failing to advance public health objectives.

The case dates back to April 20, 2020, when the petitioner was found standing outside his residential gate without a mask, reportedly violating an order issued under Section 144 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which mandated wearing face coverings in public places. Despite the prosecution's assertion that the order was duly promulgated, the court found no evidence to establish that Lakra had actual knowledge of the order.

The judgment highlighted three essential elements required for Section 188 of IPC to apply: a lawful and duly promulgated order, knowledge of the order by the accused, and disobedience causing or tending to cause obstruction, annoyance, injury, or risk to human life, health, or safety. The court observed that the petitioner's actions did not meet these criteria, particularly noting the absence of any material indicating that Lakra was COVID-positive, leading to the dropping of charges under Section 269 of IPC.

Justice Narula underscored that criminal law should not be used to punish technical deviations, especially when statutory prerequisites are unmet. He noted that the alleged act was at the margins of the mischief sought to be addressed by the public health orders issued during the pandemic. The court exercised its inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of CrPC to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice.

In a gesture of civic responsibility, the petitioner agreed to deposit INR 10,000 with the Delhi Police Welfare Fund, with the court accepting this without admission of guilt. The judgment serves as a reminder of the need for proportionality in legal enforcement during public health emergencies, while affirming the authority of the state to enforce lawful directions in appropriate cases.

Bottom Line:

Quashing of FIR - Allegations under Section 188 IPC for disobedience of order under Section 144 CrPC during COVID-19 lockdown - Continuation of proceedings deemed oppressive and disproportionate; not advancing public health objectives.

Statutory provision(s): Section 188 IPC, Section 144 CrPC, Section 195 CrPC, Section 251 CrPC, Section 269 IPC, Section 482 CrPC

Bhupinder Lakra v. State (NCT of Delhi), (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2810690