The Himachal Pradesh High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against Pallavi Ramchaik, who was proceeded against over allegations of disrupting court proceedings before a Sub-Divisional Magistrate (SDM) at Rampur Bushahr.
Justice Sandeep Sharma held that the complaint could not have been taken directly to the police in the manner adopted in the case. The Court found that Section 215 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS) prescribed a specific procedure for such prosecution.
Background of the Case
The matter arose from an incident on February 24, 2025, during the hearing of a case before the SDM, Rampur Bushahr. According to the complaint, Ramchaik entered the courtroom without permission, raised objections and advanced arguments during the proceedings.
The SDM alleged that she continued despite being asked to leave, thereby obstructing the discharge of his official duties and hampering the court proceedings.
A complaint was subsequently submitted to the SHO of Rampur Bushahr Police Station. Following this, the police prepared a Kalandra and presented it before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate.
Ramchaik approached the High Court seeking quashing of the Kalandra and all consequential proceedings. Her counsel argued that the procedure prescribed under Section 215 BNSS had not been followed.
Court's Observation
The High Court examined Section 215 BNSS, which restricts courts from taking cognizance of specified offences unless a written complaint is made by the concerned public servant, his administrative superior, or an authorised public servant.
The Court noted that the SDM himself was presiding over the proceedings when the alleged disruption took place.
“Since the complainant herein was presiding over the Court at the time when the alleged disruption was caused by the petitioner, he could have made a complaint in writing to the Court to which his Court is subordinate.”
The Court further held that instead of approaching the police, the SDM was required to make a written complaint either to the superior court or to the public servant to whom he was administratively subordinate.
The High Court also referred to Supreme Court principles governing the quashing of criminal proceedings, particularly where there is a legal bar to continuation of the case.
Decision
Justice Sandeep Sharma concluded that there was sufficient ground to exercise the High Court's inherent power under Section 528 BNSS.
The Court held that continuing the proceedings would amount to an abuse of the legal process and could cause unnecessary prejudice to the petitioner.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed the Kalandra registered under Sections 221 and 276 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita at Police Station Rampur, Bushahr, along with the consequential proceedings against Pallavi Ramchaik.
The petitioner was discharged.
Case Details
- Case Title: Pallavi Ramchaik v. State of H.P. & Ors.
- Case Number: Cr.MMO No. 497 of 2026
- Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma
- Decision Date: August 11, 2026
