Court finds allegations of extortion, assault, and caste-based insults against advocate during live-streaming inherently improbable; invokes Section 482 CrPC to quash FIR under IPC and SC/ST Act provisions
In a significant judgment delivered on October 14, 2026, the Gujarat High Court has quashed the First Information Report (FIR) registered against Advocate and social activist Mehul Mansukhbhai Boghara, who was accused of assaulting police and Traffic Regulation Branch (TRB) personnel during a live Facebook video stream. The Court held that the FIR was a mala fide counter-blast lodged by police officials to shield themselves from criminal liability after they allegedly assaulted the petitioner.
The FIR under challenge (C.R. No. 11210008221302/2022) was registered at the Sarthana Police Station, Surat, accusing the petitioner of offences punishable under Sections 332 (voluntarily causing hurt to deter public servant), 353 (assault or criminal force to deter public servant), 385 (putting person in fear of injury to commit extortion), and 427 (mischief causing damage) of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 3(1)(r) and 3(1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The background facts reveal that Mehul Boghara, while live-streaming on Facebook, exposed an alleged illegal money collection racket involving TRB personnel. During this live broadcast, the TRB Supervisor Sajan Bharwad allegedly assaulted the petitioner with a wooden log, inflicting severe injuries that necessitated emergency hospitalization. In reaction, the petitioner filed an FIR against the police/TRB personnel for attempt to murder under Section 307 IPC.
Shortly thereafter, the police lodged the impugned FIR against Mr. Boghara, alleging that he abused and physically assaulted public servants, demanded Rs. 1,000 per day as extortion under threat of viralizing videos, and used casteist language. The petitioner challenged this FIR under Section 482 CrPC, contending it was an abuse of process and an attempt to intimidate him.
The Court undertook a detailed analysis of the evidence, including live-stream and CCTV footage, and found the prosecution story to be inherently improbable. It was held that it is implausible for the petitioner to have simultaneously live-streamed publicly and engaged in extortion or physical assault on police officers. The Court referred to the Supreme Court's guidelines in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992), particularly categories (5) and (7), which permit quashing of FIRs that are absurd, inherently improbable, or maliciously instituted.
Regarding the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act allegations, the Court observed that the FIR's vague mention of casteist insults lacked the specific mens rea to humiliate on the basis of caste or promote enmity against the SC/ST community as a class. The dispute was found to be an individualized altercation related to traffic enforcement rather than caste-based atrocity.
The Court further ruled that mere videography of public servants performing duties in a public place does not amount to assault or obstruction under Sections 332 and 353 IPC. The absence of any medical evidence or credible proof of injury to police personnel negated these charges. Similarly, allegations of extortion and mischief were deemed fabricated afterthoughts, unsupported by material evidence, and contradicted by video recordings.
Concluding that the FIR was a counter-blast motivated by mala fide intent to protect TRB personnel and suppress legitimate activism, the Court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 CrPC to quash the FIR and all consequential proceedings against Mehul Boghara.
This judgment underscores the importance of protecting citizens' rights to expose corruption and the misuse of law enforcement power while ensuring that criminal law is not weaponized for personal vendetta or to stifle dissent.
Bottom Line:
Quashing of FIR - Counter-blast FIR lodged against advocate/social activist after he was allegedly assaulted by traffic/TRB personnel during live-streaming - Allegations of extortion, assault on public servant, mischief and caste-based insult found inherently improbable and mala fide - Ingredients of Sections 332, 353, 385, 427 IPC and Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(u) of SC/ST Act not made out - FIR quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 332, 353, 385, 427 IPC; Sections 3(1)(r), 3(1)(u) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989; Section 482 CrPC
Mehul Mansukhbhai Boghara v. State of Gujarat, (Gujarat) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2998050
