The Gujarat High Court has quashed an FIR and all related criminal proceedings against Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya in a case alleging outraging a woman’s modesty. Justice P. M. Raval held that the complaint’s account of a pre-planned confrontation was inherently improbable and that continuing the prosecution would amount to an abuse of the process of law.
Background
The FIR was registered at Nilambaug Police Station in Bhavnagar on February 26, 2016, under Sections 354 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The complainant alleged that Acharya, her neighbour who operated a Dabeli stall, had made unwanted romantic advances, threatened her husband and grabbed her feet when she refused his advances.
She also alleged that he had harassed her for around three months and shown her obscene video clips on his mobile phone. According to the complaint, she informed her husband about the alleged conduct before the incident, and he stayed prepared to catch the petitioner when he visited their home. The petitioner allegedly fled when the husband arrived, leaving his mobile phone behind.
Following the investigation, police filed a chargesheet on April 25, 2016. Acharya subsequently approached the High Court seeking to quash the FIR and the criminal case.
Justice P. M. Raval examined the complainant's account alongside the surrounding circumstances. The petitioner argued that the complaint was an afterthought arising from an unexpected encounter, while the State and the complainant opposed the plea, relying on the allegations and recovery of the mobile phone.
The court questioned the explanation for arranging a private confrontation rather than seeking police intervention. It observed:
"The story of setting a pre-arranged trap to catch the petitioner red-handed is an afterthought. It strongly corroborates the defences case that the husband unexpectedly caught the petitioner and the complainant together, and to cover up the domestic fallout, embarrassment, or suspicion arising therefrom, an embellished version of a forced entry and outraging of modesty under Section 354 IPC is concocted."
The court also relied on the Supreme Court's ruling in Mahmood Ali v. State of U.P., which discusses the need to scrutinise allegations when a criminal proceeding is challenged as frivolous or motivated by personal vengeance.
The judgment quoted the Supreme Court's guidance:
"In frivolous or vexatious proceedings, the Court owes a duty to look into many other attending circumstances emerging from the record of the case over and above the averments and, if need be, with due care and circumspection try to read in between the lines."
The High Court concluded that the account in the FIR lacked inherent probability and that allowing the prosecution to continue would constitute an abuse of the court's process.
Allowing the petition, the Gujarat High Court quashed FIR C.R. No. I-32/2016, the chargesheet dated April 25, 2016, and all consequential proceedings in Criminal Case No. 2838 of 2016.
Case Details
- Case Title: Sanjay Harishbhai Acharya v. State of Gujarat & Anr.
- Case Number: R/Criminal Misc. Application No. 8681 of 2016
- Judge: Justice P. M. Raval
- Decision Date: October 12, 2026
