The Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur has quashed a criminal case against a government school teacher after finding that the allegations in the FIR did not satisfy the basic ingredients of cheating under Section 318(4) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.
Justice Himanshu Joshi passed the order on September 11, 2026, in a petition filed by Roop Singh Chadar, who had challenged the FIR registered at Malthon Police Station in Sagar district.
Background
Roop Singh Chadar was serving as a teacher under the School Education Department in Sagar district. The matter arose after a newspaper report published in Dainik Bhaskar on November 18, 2024, alleged that another person was performing teaching duties in his place.
Following the report, an inspection was conducted by education department officials. Statements of students and local residents were recorded, and it was alleged that Vikram Singh Lodhi was performing teaching duties in place of Chadar.
The petitioner was suspended on November 18, 2024, and an FIR was registered the following day under Section 318(4) of the BNS.
During the pendency of the criminal case, departmental disciplinary proceedings were also initiated against the teacher. A detailed enquiry examined the allegation that another person had been working in his place.
The enquiry report specifically found that the principal charge concerning substitution by another person was not proved. Despite this finding, the petitioner’s services were subsequently terminated, primarily on the ground that the criminal case remained pending.
The High Court noted that the FIR essentially alleged that the petitioner remained absent from duty while another person allegedly performed his teaching functions.
The Court observed that Section 318(4) of the BNS requires essential elements of cheating, including deception, dishonest inducement and consequential delivery of property or wrongful gain. According to the Court, the FIR did not contain allegations of inducement, fraudulent representation or delivery of property attributable to the petitioner.
The Court stated:
"At the highest, the allegations may constitute a matter relating to service misconduct warranting departmental action. However, the material placed on record does not disclose the commission of the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of BNS."
The Court also noted that the departmental enquiry had failed to establish the central allegation on which the criminal case was based.
Relying on the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, the High Court held that criminal proceedings could be quashed where the allegations, even if accepted as stated, did not constitute an offence or where continuation of the proceedings would amount to abuse of the process of law.
The Court concluded that continuing the criminal case against Chadar would serve no useful purpose and would amount to abuse of the process of law.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition and quashed FIR Crime No. 378/2024 registered at Malthon Police Station, Sagar, under Section 318(4) of the BNS, along with all consequential proceedings insofar as they concerned the petitioner.
Case Details
Case Title: Roop Singh Chadar v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Others
Case Number: Misc. Criminal Case No. 23406 of 2026
Judge: Justice Himanshu Joshi
Decision Date: September 11, 2026
-300x169.webp)
