Allegations of Stalking and Criminal Intimidation Must Be Tested at Trial: Gujarat High Court Refuses to Quash FIR

The Gujarat High Court refused to quash an FIR registered against the petitioner for stalking, criminal intimidation, and outraging the modesty of a woman. Justice Sandeep N. Bhatt, while dismissing the petition filed under Section 482 of the CrPC, held that serious allegations of harassment and threats made against a woman required a full trial rather than premature judicial intervention.

"The nature of the allegations, supported by the charge sheet, cannot be brushed aside at this stage. The accused must face trial to establish his defense, and the court cannot short-circuit the process by quashing the FIR," observed the High Court.

The FIR (I Crime Register No. 11199001220745 of 2022) was lodged on July 25, 2022, at City C Division Police Station, Bharuch, under Sections 354D, 509, 504, and 506(2) of the IPC. The complainant alleged that the accused harassed women in the society, made obscene gestures, secretly took their photographs without consent, and threatened the complainant by invoking occult practices. Following an investigation, a charge sheet was filed, and Criminal Case No. 3495 of 2023 was initiated before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch.

The petitioner moved the High Court seeking quashing of the FIR, claiming that the allegations were motivated and retaliatory. He argued that the complainant had filed the case as a counterblast to a prior dispute and that continuing proceedings would be an abuse of process.

The High Court, rejecting the petitioner’s arguments, placed reliance on the Supreme Court’s decision in Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra, which held that "quashing of an FIR should be an exception, not the norm." The court emphasized that criminal investigations should not be thwarted unless the allegations are manifestly false or frivolous.

Referring to the case of Somjeet Mallick v. State of Jharkhand (2024) 10 SCC 527, the High Court reiterated that "an FIR is not an encyclopedia; the allegations must be examined at face value. At the stage of quashing, the court cannot assess the veracity of evidence, which is the domain of the trial court."

The court also underlined the statutory duty of the police to investigate cognizable offenses under the IPC and held that interfering with the process at this stage would amount to a pre-trial acquittal.

"The allegations involve conduct that, if proven, directly impacts the dignity and safety of women. Courts must be cautious in quashing such cases without allowing due process to unfold," noted Justice Bhatt.

Dismissing the petition, the Gujarat High Court refused to interfere in the ongoing trial, holding that the allegations raised serious concerns about harassment and intimidation and required a full-fledged judicial inquiry.

"In cases involving stalking and intimidation, where there is a prima facie case, judicial interference must be exercised with extreme caution. The accused has the full opportunity to defend himself in trial proceedings, and quashing the FIR at this stage would be premature and unjustified," the court ruled.

Thus, the High Court upheld the validity of the FIR and the ongoing proceedings, affirming that criminal jurisprudence demands a fair trial rather than summary dismissal of allegations at the preliminary stage.
 

Date of Decision: 04 February 2025