IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA

CRIMINAL REVISIONAL JURISDICTION

[CIRCUIT BENCH AT PORT BLAIR]

PRESENT : THE HON'BLE JUSTICE TIRTHANKAR GHOSH

CRR/3/2026

IA No. CRAN/1/2026

SHRI E. VENKATA RAO … PETITIONER

VS.

THE STATE AND ANOTHER … RESPONDENTS

For the petitioner : Mr. Kushagra Pandey

(through virtual mode]

Mr. Pardeshia Munda

For the respondents : Mr. Sumit Kumar Karmakar

Heard on : March 19, 2026

Judgment delivered on : March 23, 2026

TIRTHANKAR GHOSH, J.

1. The present revisional application has been filed under section

528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 praying for

quashing of Pahargaon Police Station Case being FIR No.0170 of 2023

corresponding to G.R. Case No.946 of 2023 as also the charge sheet filed

in connection with the said proceeding which is pending before the

learned Judicial Magistrate, Second Court, Port Blair, Andaman and

Nicobar Islands.

2

2. The allegations made in the FIR were on the basis of an

information advanced by the informant/complainant to the Station

House Officer of the Pahargoan Police Station to the effect that the

informant/complainant is a trainee of Surveyor Unit -I, Dollygunj, Port

Blair. An Instructor namely E.V. Rao/petitioner of Surveyor Trade

Incharge joined the department in the last week of July and started

taking classes from the month of August, 2023.

3. The informant alleges that as soon the petitioner started taking

class, he spoke on inappropriate topics as, if girls want to have

relationship with a boy, they should get experience from a man

physically and mentioned there is no good touch and bad touch rather it

is the mindset of the girls.

4. It was further alleged that the petitioner advanced towards her

with bad intention and on last week of August 2023, i.e 27

th

August,

2023 to 5

th

September, 2023 during practical classes while using tripod,

the petitioner advanced towards the informant from backside and

touched her waist and when she tried to avoid him, he forcibly made her

stand in front of the tripod and acted as if he is teaching her but touched

her breast and rubbed her back to waist because of which she felt

shameful and uncomfortable. She tried to avoid the petitioner and after

the incident when the petitioner found that she was not acting as per his

instruction, he threatened her with dire consequences for which she was

scared as he was a teacher and her career would be jeopardized. She did

not reveal the incident to anyone as the petitioner kept threatening her

3

that he will force her to leave the course. Later she came to know from

her friends namely, Shabnam, Najiya, Misruya, Nirmala, Sangita,

Neeshita that the petitioner has also touched them inappropriately. She,

therefore, requested to take strict legal action against the petitioner for

molesting her and speaking with her in vulgar language.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint to the Station House

Officer, the present case was registered for investigation and on

completion of investigation, charge sheet was submitted before the

jurisdictional Court. It is reflected from the charge sheet that the

prosecution relied upon 23 witnesses out of which 15 witnesses

including the complainant/informant were girls of the institute.

6. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner challenged the

continuation of the proceeding on the ground that the

complainant/informant submitted information with the police authority

which is an afterthought and to that effect he relied upon a document

which is the letter addressed to the Principal dated 22

nd

September,

2023.

7. Learned advocate, by referring to the said letter, submitted that the

contents of the letter would reflect that there were no details of incident

stated in the said written information and the subsequent letter which

was addressed to the Station House Officer dated 27

th September, 2023

do reflect a separate set of incidents.

4

8. Learned advocate for the petitioner, thereafter, referred to the

statement of the informant under section 164 of the Code of Criminal

Procedure and drew the attention of the Court to the contents of the

same. According to the learned advocate, there was not only deviation

from the letter which was sent on 21

st September, 2023 to the Principal

but there was improvement also in the statement under section 164 of

the Cr.P.C which is a statement recorded before the learned Judicial

Magistrate.

9. Learned advocate also drew the attention of the Court to certain

documents which included the register/attendance diaries in respect of

the students to fortify his claim that from 27

th

August, 2023 to 5

th

September, 2023, the petitioner was never present in the classes which

were held and as such the allegations which have been made in the

instant case against the present petitioner has been manufactured to

cover up her own misdeeds and incompetency as a student for the

particular curriculum.

10. Learned advocate also intended to rely upon certain other

documents which he obtained under the Right to Information Act but

this Court felt that at this stage, the law permits only the documents

which are of sterling quality can be looked into and not every documents

is to be considered. In fact the attendance register/class diaries, which

were referred to by the petitioner, were objected by this Court so also the

letter addressed to the Principal as the authenticity and genuinity of the

document is a question of fact to be proved in course of the trial and

5

were not part of the documents which were supplied to the petitioner

under section 207 of the Cr.P.C.

11. Learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that First

Information Report which was registered pursuant to the information

filed by the Opposite Party No.2 is false, vexatious as she was aggrieved

by the adverse entries returned by the petitioner in her daily diaries as

well as her classmates. The petitioner specifically contended that he

being an outright strict teacher and refusing to accept the indiscipline

committed by the opposite party and her classmates who ganged up and

falsely implicated the petitioner. It has been submitted that the petitioner

has made out a case both on facts and law in support of his contention.

12. It was contended by the petitioner that the discharge application

filed by the petitioner having been rejected by the learned Magistrate do

not impact the maintainability of the present petition under section 528

of BNSS as has been held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Mukesh and

others vs. State of U.P and others ( SLP (Crl) No.12354 of 2024). The

scope of a petition under section 528 BNSS being much more wider than

the discharge application, the accused is entitled to take a ground of

abuse of process of law, and as such produce and rely on material to

show abuse of process of law which is not possible in discharge

proceeding.

13. The petitioner also relied upon judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme

Court in Pradeep Kumar Kesarwan vs. State of UP reported in 2025

6

SCC OnLine SC 1947 wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court has expressly

held that in cases pertaining to abuse of process of law, Court must read

between the lines as in such cases, the complainant will ensure to

introduce such elements in the complaint/FIR which make out the

ingredients of the offence.

14. Reference was made to paragraph 20 which reads as follows:

“20. The following steps should ordinarily determine the veracity of a

prayer for quashing, raised by an accused by invoking the power vested in

the High Court under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C.:

(i) Step one, whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound,

reasonable, and indubitable, i.e., the materials is of sterling and

impeccable quality?

(ii) Step two, whether the material relied upon by the accused, would rule

out the assertions contained in the charges levelled against the accused,

ie., the material is sufficient to reject and overrule the factual assertions

contained in the complaint. ie. the material is such, as would persuade a

reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis of the

accusations as false.

(iii) Step three, whether the material relied upon by the accused, has not

been refuted by the prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such,

that it cannot be justifiably refuted by the prosecution/complainant?

(iv) Step four, whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of

process of the Court, and would not serve the ends of justice?

If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, judicial conscience of the

High Court should persuade it to quash such criminal - proceedings, in

exercise of power vested in it under Section 482 of the Cr. PC. Such

exercise of power, besides doing justice to the accused, would save

precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in holding such a

trial (as well as, proceedings arising therefrom) specially when, it is clear

that the same would not conclude in the conviction of the accused.”

15. Thus while considering an application under section 528 of the

BNSS, according to the petitioner, the Court should ensure that the

continuation of the trial would not result in abuse of the process of law.

7

16. Learned advocate thereafter relied upon in Appaiya vs.

Andhimuthu reported in (2024) 19 SCC 602 and submitted that the

provisions of sections 74, 76, 77 and 79 of the Indian Evidence Act were

analyzed in the said judgment and it was explained how the same would

apply to the certified copy even if private documents are produced and

obtained under RTI Act.

17. The petitioner as such intends to rely on the judgment in so far as

the facts emerging from the attendance register and daily dairies of the

students (including the complainant/opposite party no.2) are concerned.

Learned advocate also relied upon a judgment of the Delhi High Court in

Saurabh Aggarwal Vs. State reported in 2022 SCC OnLine Del 5178

and Dr. Karunakar Patra vs. State reported in 2022 SCC OnLine

Del 245 to fortify his arguments that in recent times there has been an

alarming rise in filing of false cases pertaining to sexual harassment.

18. Reference was made to Anand Kumar Mohatta vs. State

reported in (2019) 11 SCC 706 to canvass the issue that if FIR itself is

an abuse of process of law, filing of charge sheet in such abusive FIR

only aggravates the abuse of process of law.

19. Learned advocate appearing for the petitioner as such submitted

that based on the documents placed by the petitioner and taking an

overall view of the case, the proceedings deserves to be quashed

principally on the ground of abuse of process of law.

8

20. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the State

opposed the prayer advanced by the petitioner and submitted that it is

not only the present complainant who has accused the present petitioner

but there were other girls who made similar allegations against the

petitioner.

21. On behalf the State, attention of the Court was drawn to the

statements of Holiyari Kumari, Neha Halder, Riya Sheel, Shabnam,

Najiya Banu, Misriya, Nirmala, Sangeeta Toppo, Shivani as also one

student namely Vasudev.

22. I have taken into account the statements of the relevant

witnesses, which has been relied upon by the learned Public Prosecutor

as also submissions advanced by the learned advocate appearing for the

petitioner whose main contention was the case being an afterthought and

the petitioner has been implicated in connection with the instant case by

the informant/complainant out of malice as she herself is not only an

incompetent student but also wanted to cover up her misdeeds and so

set the criminal law into motion.

23. On perusal of the records of the case, it is reflected that, after the

registration of the FIR, the investigation concluded and resulted in a

charge sheet wherein the petitioner has been charged under sections

354(A)/506 of the Indian Penal Code.

24. The petitioner has also preferred a discharge application under

section 239 of the Cr.P.C before the learned Judicial Magistrate/Trial

9

Court and the learned Magistrate, on consideration of the materials as

well as the documents which were relied upon by the petitioner, refused

to discharge the petitioner holding that the stage of the case do require

the prosecution on documents to be considered with precedence.

25. As observed earlier, it would be apposite to state that on an

assessment of the statements of each of the witnesses named above, I

find that there is consistency in the accusation and the same is more or

less identical so far as it relates to the petitioner’s communication to the

girl students, his intention of touching inappropriately the girl student

and also creating circumstances for touching the girl student so as to

embarrass them.

26. Now section 354 A of the Indian Penal Code incorporates within its

ambit “physical contact and advances involving, unwelcome and explicit

sexual overtures”. Having regard to the materials which have been

collected by the Investigating Agency in support of the charges

particularly with the consistent statements of the girl students, it would

be unwise at this stage to accept the contention of the petitioner that the

complainant and/or investigation was a result of malafide complaint for

wreaking vengeance.

27. Apart from the aforesaid, this Court has to appreciate the stage of

the case. The records reflect that the learned Trial Court has, by its order

dated 26

th August, 2025, dismissed the application under section 239 of

10

the Cr.P.C and proceeded to fix a date for charges. Thus, the stage of the

case is for consideration of the charges.

28. Having regard to the present stage of the case and the principle

settled by the Hon’ble Apex court in a catena of decisions, the Court, at

this stage, is prevented from conducting a mini trial. Further, if the

documents relied upon by the prosecution failed to establish a case of

‘grave suspicion’ but makes out a case of ‘some suspicion’ then only the

Court can interfere with the proceeding.

29. Taking into account the materials collected by the Investigating

Agency, particularly the statement of girl students, who have consistently

stated the manner in which the petitioner made physical contacts,

unwelcome advances and explicit sexual overtures, I am of the view that

the prosecution has been able to substantiate, prima facie the charges

levelled against the present petitioner. Further the documents relied

upon by the petitioner are not of sterling quality or unimpeachable in

nature to be relied upon at this stage.

30. Consequently, I am not inclined to interfere with the further

continuation of the present proceeding. As such, the criminal revisional

application being CRR/3/2026 is dismissed.

31. Pending application, if any, is consequently disposed of.

32. Let the case diary be returned to the learned Public Prosecutor

immediately.

11

33. All parties shall act on the server copy of this judgment duly

downloaded from the official website of this Court.

34. Urgent photostat certified copy of this judgment, if applied for, be

supplied to the parties upon compliance of all requisite formalities.

( Tirthankar Ghosh, J. )