Gauhati HC Keeps IPC 352 Case Against College Principal Alive Over Alleged Push Of Students, Leaves Provocation Claim For Trial

Respondent No. 2 and two others lodged an FIR alleging that, during a dispute over students’ attendance at Rabindra Sadan Girls’ College, the petitioner—then Principal—misbehaved with them, pushed students out of his chamber, and caught respondent No. 2 by the hand and pushed her outside

The police submitted a final report, finding no material under IPC Section 354B or Sections 67/67A of the Information Technology Act, but noting material under IPC Section 352; the report was submitted on the stated ground that Section 352 was non-cognizable

Respondent No. 2 then filed a complaint, registered as C.R. Case No. 96/2022. After considering statements recorded in the complaint proceedings and during the investigation, the Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance under Section 352 IPC on 11 March 2022

The petitioner sought to quash the complaint proceedings under Section 482 CrPC

An earlier petition to quash the FIR had been dismissed, with the Court observing that registration under Section 352 IPC did not appear incorrect

Section 482 CrPC preserves the High Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of process and secure the ends of justice; quashing is appropriate in the illustrative circumstances set out in State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, including where allegations accepted at face value do not disclose an offence, or proceedings are manifestly mala fide

Sections 349 and 351 IPC define force and assault, respectively, while Section 352 IPC concerns assault or use of criminal force otherwise than on grave and sudden provocation

The Court also relied on Anukul Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 2060, for the principles that Section 482 jurisdiction must be exercised sparingly, but may be used to prevent abuse of process; disputed factual questions ordinarily require trial

The Court found that the allegations in the FIR and complaint were materially the same and, on a plain reading, disclosed a prima facie case under Section 352 IPC

It noted that the Magistrate had considered the complainant’s and witnesses’ statements, including statements recorded during the earlier investigation, before taking cognizance; the decision to proceed only under Section 352 IPC also reflected consideration of the material and rejection of the other alleged offences

The police final report did not establish an absence of material, since the investigating officer had noted material under Section 352 IPC

The petitioner’s contention that the students provoked him, and that any force was used in response, raised a factual question for consideration at the charge or trial stage rather than a basis for quashing at the threshold

The Court therefore found no ground under the Bhajan Lal categories to terminate the proceedings

Finding the petition devoid of merit, it dismissed the application to quash C.R. Case No. 96/2022 and the cognizance order, leaving the petitioner to raise his defence at the consideration-of-charge stage or at trial