Court finds prosecution story engineered and inherently improbable, quashing criminal case under Sections 354 and 114 IPC to prevent misuse of judicial process
In a significant judgment dated October 12, 2026, the Gujarat High Court, through Justice P. M. Raval, quashed a First Information Report (FIR) and subsequent criminal proceedings against Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya, who faced allegations of outraging the modesty of a woman under Sections 354 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Court held that the prosecution's narrative was "inherently improbable and unnatural," amounting to an abuse of the legal process.
The FIR, lodged by a 35-year-old housewife residing in Bhavnagar, accused the petitioner, a neighbor running a Dabeli stall, of repeatedly harassing her for over three months. The complainant alleged that Sanjay Acharya showed obscene clips on his mobile phone and made unwelcome advances. On the day of the incident, she claimed the accused came to her home, threatened to kill her husband, and grabbed her feet. The FIR further described a premeditated plan where the complainant had allegedly informed her husband in advance about the accused's visit so that he could be caught red-handed.
However, the Court's detailed scrutiny revealed several inconsistencies and inherent improbabilities in the prosecution's case. The complainant's prolonged silence about harassment, justified by fear of social stigma, was found contradictory to her sudden decision to orchestrate a "trap" by staying at home and involving her husband to catch the accused. The Court opined that such conduct was "contrary to natural human behaviour" of a genuine victim of harassment and appeared to be a contrived story to lend a criminal color to what was essentially a domestic issue.
The petitioner's counsel argued that the FIR was a counterblast following a domestic fallout and accused the complainant and her husband of fabricating the allegations. The Court, applying the principle established in the Supreme Court precedent of State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal (1992), emphasized that the inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) must be exercised to prevent the misuse of the criminal justice system when the allegations fail to inspire judicial confidence.
Referring to the recent Supreme Court ruling in Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P. (2023) 15 SCC 488, the Court underscored its duty to look beyond the mere averments in the FIR and consider the attending circumstances and materials collected during investigation to detect mala fide or vexatious prosecutions.
Consequently, the Gujarat High Court quashed the FIR, the chargesheet dated April 25, 2016, and the entire criminal case pending against Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya, holding that continuation of the prosecution would amount to an abuse of process of the Court.
This judgment reiterates the judiciary's commitment to safeguarding individuals from frivolous and malicious criminal proceedings while balancing the protection of genuine victims' rights.
Bottom Line:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482 Quashing of FIR - Where allegations in FIR alleging offence under Section 354 IPC were found inherently improbable and unnatural, and prosecution story appeared to be an afterthought engineered to give criminal colour to a different domestic situation, continuation of criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of Court - FIR, chargesheet and consequential criminal case quashed.
Statutory provision(s):
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860 Sections 354, 114
Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya v. State of Gujarat, (Gujarat) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2995507
