Chhattisgarh High Court: In a set of petitions filed by Assistant Professors at Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur (‘the University’) seeking quashing of an FIR registered against them under Sections 190, 196(1)(b), 197(1)(b), 197(1)(c), 299, and 302 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (‘BNS’) and Section 4 of Chhattisgarh Freedom of Religion Act, 1968 (‘CFRA’), the Division Bench of Ramesh Sinha*, CJ., Mohan Pandey, J., dismissed the petitions, holding that since the professors were already on bail, the investigation was going on, and the chargesheet has not been filed yet, it would not be appropriate to make any observations on the merits of the case.
Background
The petitioners were Assistant Professors at Guru Ghasidas University, Bilaspur (‘the University’). A National Service Scheme (‘NSS’) Camp was organised by the University, and the Professors were deputed to coordinate and supervise it. Thereafter, a complaint was lodged by three Hindu participants of the NSS Camp, stating that the professors compelled them to offer namaz. Accordingly, the FIR was lodged.
The Professors contended that the complaint was lodged with a delay of two weeks, and it was politically motivated false accusations. Furthermore, the camp had 150 Hindu students as participants, but only three of them lodged the FIR.
Analysis
At the outset, the Court placed reliance on Neeharika Infrastructure (P) Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra (2021) 19 SCC 401, wherein the Supreme Court, while dealing with the issue of quashing the FIR at an initial stage, held that criminal proceedings ought not to be scuttled at the initial stage and quashing of a complaint/ FIR should be an exception and a rarity than an ordinary rule. The Court also held that when a prayer for quashing the FIR is made by the alleged accused, the Court, while exercising the power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (‘CrPC’), only has to consider whether or not the allegations in the FIR disclose the commission of a cognizable offence and is not required to consider on merits whether the allegations make out a cognizable offence or not and the Court has to permit the investigating agency/police to investigate the allegations in the FIR.
The Court noted that in the present case, the Professors were already on bail, the investigation was ongoing, and the chargesheet had not been filed yet. Therefore, the Court held that it would not be appropriate to make any observations on the merits of the case.
Accordingly, the petitions were dismissed.
[Dilip Jha v. State of Chhattisgarh, CRMP No. 1744 of 2025, decided on 27-05-2025]
*Judgment authored by: Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For the petitioners: Awadh Tripathi
For the respondent: Arvind Dubey, Govt. Advocate
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
