The Karnataka High Court has quashed criminal proceedings against Youth Congress leader Mohammed Haris Nalapad in a case linked to a protest at Bengaluru’s Whitefield railway station. The court ruled that the charges filed under certain provisions of the Railways Act were not legally sustainable because the essential ingredients of those offences were missing.
Justice M. Nagaprasanna delivered the order on February 9, 2026, allowing the writ petition filed by Nalapad and setting aside the case pending before a Bengaluru magistrate court.
Background of the Case
The case traces back to July 27, 2022. According to the Railway Protection Force (RPF), about 20 members of the Congress party gathered at Platform No. 3 of Whitefield railway station to protest against certain policies of the Central Government.
Read also:- Supreme Court Issues Contempt Notice to 50+ Delhi Hospitals Over Alleged Violation of Free Treatment Rules
During the protest, the demonstrators allegedly squatted in front of Train No. 01773 running between Bangarpet and KSR Bengaluru. The agitation delayed the train’s departure by approximately 39 minutes before railway officials and police cleared the track.
Following a complaint from the station master, the RPF registered Crime No. 776/2022 and later filed a chargesheet accusing Nalapad and others of offences under Sections 145(c), 147, 154 and 174(a) of the Railways Act, 1989.
The magistrate court took cognizance of the offences and issued summons, which led Nalapad to approach the High Court seeking to quash the proceedings.
Counsel for the petitioner argued that the most serious charge Section 154 of the Railways Act was wrongly invoked.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Upholds 498A Conviction in Dowry Harassment Case, but Reduces Jail Term
The lawyer submitted that neither the complaint nor the chargesheet alleged any act that endangered passenger safety or damaged railway property. According to the defence, the allegation only referred to protesters sitting on the track, which caused a delay but did not threaten safety.
The prosecution, represented by the Additional Special Public Prosecutor, opposed the petition and maintained that the protesters had obstructed the railway track and therefore the matter should proceed to trial.
After reviewing the records, Justice Nagaprasanna found that the complaint mainly described a protest that temporarily delayed the train.
The court also noted that the order of the magistrate taking cognizance did not clearly show how the ingredients of the alleged offences were satisfied.
“The order of taking cognizance… does not inspire even a semblance of confidence,” the court observed, pointing out that the provisions relating to endangering safety and obstructing railway operations were not properly made out in the case.
Read also:- Delhi High Court Grants Police Protection to Live-In Couple Facing Threats from Woman’s Father
The judge also referred to a similar ruling by the Himachal Pradesh High Court, which had held that prosecution cannot continue when the essential elements of the alleged offences are absent.
Concluding that the charges lacked legal basis, the High Court allowed the petition.
“The writ petition is allowed,” the court ordered.
It further directed that the criminal proceedings in C.C. No. 32925/2022 pending before the XLI Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Court, Bengaluru, stand quashed in respect of the petitioner.
Case Title:- Mohammed Haris Nalapad vs State by SGWF Post Police Station (RPF)
Case Number:- Writ Petition No. 32 of 2026 (GM-RES)
Date of Judgment:- 9 February 2026
