The Calcutta High Court has refused to quash criminal proceedings against a man accused of assaulting and attempting to outrage a woman’s modesty, holding that the case must go to trial.
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) dismissed the criminal revision filed by Uttam Mondal, observing that once charges have been framed and material exists on record, the High Court must act with caution before stepping in.
Read also:- Bombay HC Disposes Unmarried Woman’s Abortion Plea, Cites Supreme Court Ruling on MTP Rights
Background of the Case
The case arose from a complaint lodged on May 18, 2022, at Bishnupur Police Station in South 24 Parganas. The complainant alleged that a day earlier, while she was returning home around 7:55 pm, the accused wrongfully restrained her near her house.
She accused him of abusing her, assaulting her with fists and kicks, pushing her against a boundary wall, and attempting to outrage her modesty. The complaint further alleged that he tried to snatch her gold chain during the scuffle and threatened her.
She also claimed that for several years, he had been troubling her and making unwanted advances. On the day of the alleged incident, she said he even took out a sharp weapon and a glass bottle containing liquid, allegedly attempting to throw it at her face before fleeing on his scooter when locals gathered.
Police registered a case under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code, including wrongful restraint, causing grievous hurt, attempt to commit culpable homicide, stalking, criminal intimidation and insulting modesty. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed and charges were framed by the trial court.
Read also:- Calcutta High Court Refuses to Quash Forgery Case Linked to 1963 Land Deed, Orders Police Prob
Petitioner’s Arguments
Appearing for the petitioner, counsel argued that the case was false and filed as a “counter blast” to a complaint earlier lodged by the accused against the woman and her family.
It was submitted that the parties were former college mates and had been in a relationship between 2016 and 2019. The defence claimed that when the petitioner initiated legal action against her father, the present complaint followed in retaliation.
The petitioner also pointed to alleged inconsistencies in the complainant’s statement and argued that the doctor who treated her had not been examined and that the medical report was not part of the charge-sheet.
Counsel urged the court to quash the proceedings under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which gives High Courts inherent powers to prevent abuse of process.
Read also:- Bombay High Court Flags Flawed Tree-Felling Notices, Closes Pune Coconut Trees Case
Stand of the State and the Complainant
Counsel for the complainant opposed the plea, pointing out that charges had already been framed in June 2025 and the trial had begun. The victim had been examined as the first prosecution witness.
It was also highlighted that the petitioner had earlier sought discharge before the trial court, but that plea was rejected. The present revision, the complainant argued, did not even challenge the discharge order.
The State submitted that there were sufficient materials on record and that the petitioner must face trial.
Court’s Observations
Justice Chaitali Chatterjee (Das) noted that the power to quash criminal proceedings must be exercised sparingly. Referring to Supreme Court rulings, the court reminded that inherent powers under Section 482 are not meant to “choke or smother a legitimate prosecution.”
The bench observed, “The parameters required for quashing a complaint after submission of charge-sheet are not the same.”
The court stressed that once the trial court, after examining the materials, finds grounds to frame charges, the High Court should be cautious in interfering.
The judge also observed that merely because the petitioner had filed a complaint earlier against the complainant, it could not automatically render her complaint false or malicious.
“In course of investigation also sufficient materials are found in existence,” the court noted, adding that the trial court had applied its mind before rejecting the discharge plea.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Orders Probe Into ₹14 Lakh Sabarimala Staff Transfers During Mandala
The Decision
After examining the case diary, statements of witnesses, and the procedural history, the High Court held that it found no ground to quash the proceedings.
The court concluded that the allegations were serious and supported by prima facie material, and that the matter must be decided through trial.
Accordingly, the criminal revisional application was dismissed. No order as to costs was passed.
Case Title: Uttam Mondal vs The State of West Bengal & Anr.
Case No.: CRR 4805 of 2023
Decision Date: 11 February 2026
