As per case facts, a revisional application was filed by an instructor, E.V. Rao, seeking to quash an FIR and charge sheet alleging inappropriate behavior and sexual harassment towards female ... students during classes. The complainant, a trainee, reported the instructor for making inappropriate remarks and physically touching her and other girls. The petitioner argued the allegations were an afterthought, malicious, and fabricated to cover the complainant's incompetence, citing inconsistencies in statements and his absence from classes during the alleged incidents. His discharge application was previously rejected. The question arose whether the revisional application under BNSS Section 528 should be allowed to quash the proceedings given the petitioner's claims of abuse of process and the evidence presented. Finally, the Court found consistency in the statements of the girl students and determined that the prosecution had prima facie substantiated the charges. The documents relied upon by the petitioner were not considered of sterling quality. Therefore, the Court was not inclined to interfere with the ongoing proceedings, dismissing the revisional application as the stage of the case was for charge consideration, not a mini-trial, and substantial suspicion existed to proceed.