Criminal proceedings should not be quashed where alleged facts disclose the charged offences.

The petitioner invoked Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, seeking to quash the criminal proceedings in Gonda P.S. Case No. 34 of 2023, including the Magistrate’s order dated 16 August 2023 taking cognizance of offences under Sections 341, 323 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).

The petitioner contended that the allegations were false; the State opposed the petition, submitting that the allegations and investigation supported the offences charged.

The case was listed for evidence, and one witness had been examined.

1. Whether the criminal proceedings and cognizance order should be quashed under Section 528 of the BNSS

2. Whether the allegations, taken at face value, disclose offences under Sections 341, 323 and 504 IPC

Section 528 of the BNSS provides the High Court’s inherent power to grant appropriate relief in a criminal proceeding.

The Court considered Sections 341, 323 and 504 IPC, concerning wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt and intentional insult with intent to provoke a breach of the peace.

Relying on State of Gujarat v. Girish Radhakrishnan Varde, (2014) 3 SCC 659, para 15, the Court stated that, in a case based on a police report, the Magistrate cannot add or subtract offences while taking cognizance; the appropriate trial court may determine at the charge-framing stage whether charges should be added or removed, with reference to the material collected and the facts disclosed.

The Court noted the specific allegations that the petitioner assaulted and throttled the informant, causing pain, wrongfully restrained him, and intentionally insulted him with the requisite intent.

The police found the allegations true after investigation and submitted a charge sheet, on which the Magistrate took cognizance.

Finding sufficient material to constitute the charged offences even if the allegations were taken as true in their entirety, the Court found no justifiable basis to exercise its inherent jurisdiction to quash the proceedings.

The Court also observed that questions about adding or removing charges could be considered by the trial court at the appropriate stage.

The criminal miscellaneous petition was dismissed as without merit.

The petitioner’s interlocutory application was separately dismissed as withdrawn.