CRM-M-72030 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT BAJINDER SINGH @ PASTOR STATE OF PUNJAB Present: CORAM : ALOK JAIN, J. 1. BNSS, 2023 registered under Section 354 of the POCSO Kapurthala, Punjab. Further prayer is for setting aside the order dated 09.07.2025 whereby charges were framed under Sectio 506 of IPC and Sections 6, 2. the FIR, to narrate the allegations levelled by the prosecutrix submitted, at than three years from the alleged harassment the FIR was lodged shortly a failed on 16.02.2025, 72030-2025 (O&M) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-72030-2025 (O&M) Reserved on : 29.01.2026 Date of Decision/Pronouncement : Date of uploading: 09.03.2026 BAJINDER SINGH @ PASTOR Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS. Mr. Sanjeev Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Japjot Singh, AAG, Punjab. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN ALOK JAIN, J. The present petition has been filed BNSS, 2023 seeking quashing of the FIR registered under Section 354-A,354-D,506 IPC and Sections 12, of the POCSO Act, 2012 at Police Station City Kapurthala, Kapurthala, Punjab. Further prayer is for setting aside the order dated 09.07.2025 whereby charges were framed under Sectio 506 of IPC and Sections 6, 10, 12 of POCSO Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner adverted to the cont the FIR, to narrate the allegations levelled by the prosecutrix at the very outset, that there is an unexplained delay of years from the alleged harassment was lodged shortly after the alleged settlement discussions 16.02.2025, which clearly demonstrate the -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 2025 (O&M) : 29.01.2026 Date of Decision/Pronouncement :- 07.03.2026 03.2026 ……Petitioner Versus ……Respondents Mr. Sanjeev Sehgal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Japjot Singh, AAG, Punjab. HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK JAIN The present petition has been filed under Section 528 of seeking quashing of the FIR No. 56 dated 28.02.2025 D,506 IPC and Sections 12, 6, 9, 10 2012 at Police Station City Kapurthala, District Kapurthala, Punjab. Further prayer is for setting aside the order dated 09.07.2025 whereby charges were framed under Sections 354-A, 354-D, 12 of POCSO Act. Learned Counsel for the petitioner adverted to the content of the FIR, to narrate the allegations levelled by the prosecutrix and has is an unexplained delay of more years from the alleged harassment. It is further submitted that alleged settlement discussions had which clearly demonstrate the mala fide intent MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 rather than a bona fide grievance. is no independent witness to the alleged offence and there is no substantive corroborative evidence Moreover, accusation, as mental health conditions are multifactorial. 3. allegations levelled against the petitioner suffer from material contradictions by the prosecutrix supplementary statement as read by the lea under: 72030-2025 (O&M) rather than a bona fide grievance. Learned counsel contended that there is no independent witness to the alleged offence and there is no tantive corroborative evidence to substantiate the allegations Moreover, treatment for anxiety or panic attacks does not establish sation, as mental health conditions are multifactorial. Learned Counsel for the petitioner allegations levelled against the petitioner suffer from material contradictions, as in the supplementary statement dated 20.03.2025 given by the prosecutrix, there are material improvements. supplementary statement as read by the learned counsel “"I state that I am a resident of above address. On the basis of an application given me, an FIR No. 56 dated 28.02.2025 under Sections 354 354-D, 506 IPC was registered at Police City Kapurthala. My date of birth is 18. 5.2004, which is correct as per my birth certificate and school certificate. In the month of December started visiting the Church of Prophet Baljinder situated at Tajpur, Jalandhar, along with my parents, my age was around 13 years. joined the Worship Team around 16 years. In the Prophet Baljinder Singh started making me sit alone in the Lay Head Cabin of the Tajpur Church. The date was 17 July 2022. In It the month of October 2021, Prophet Bajinder Singh started doing "Bad Touch" to me but I -2- Learned counsel contended that there is no independent witness to the alleged offence and there is no to substantiate the allegations. reatment for anxiety or panic attacks does not establish sation, as mental health conditions are multifactorial. for the petitioner further submitted that the allegations levelled against the petitioner suffer from material in the supplementary statement dated 20.03.2025 given there are material improvements. The content of the rned counsel is reproduced as “"I state that I am a resident of above-mentioned address. On the basis of an application given me, an FIR No. 56 dated 28.02.2025 under Sections 354-A, D, 506 IPC was registered at Police City f birth is 18. 5.2004, which is correct as per my birth certificate and school In the month of December of the year 2017, when I the Church of Prophet Baljinder Singh Tajpur, Jalandhar, along with my parents, e was around 13 years. In the year 2020, when I the Worship Team in the church, my age was around 16 years. In the last week of July 2022, Baljinder Singh started making me sit alone in the Lay Head Cabin of the Tajpur Church. The date In It the month of October 2021, Prophet Bajinder Singh started doing "Bad Touch" to me but I ignored MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 20.02.2025, claims the Worship Team 20.03.2025, per the seizure memo, her date of birth as 18.05.2004 have been 13 years in December 2017, when began attending the church Learned counsel contended that the said goes to the very basis a foundational element POCSO Act. 4. contradictions in the date of engagement mentioned in both the statements. Moreover begin from 2022 onwards, however, in her supplementary statement, the allegations was specific date. 5. from glaring forensic gaps petitioner was seized itself records that the “suspicious numbers” belonged to the 72030-2025 (O&M) it. Later on, when he started messaging me on mobile, I began noticing it. At that 17 years." It is submitted that the complainant in 20.02.2025, claims herself to be 17 years old in 2020 the Worship Team, however, in her supplementary statement dated 20.03.2025, the complainant states that she e seizure memo, the birth certificate records date of birth as 18.05.2004, which if accepted, have been 13 years in December 2017, when began attending the church and not 16-17 Learned counsel contended that the said inconsistency is not trivial but very basis of the prosecution case, as the complainant’s age is a foundational element for invocation of the stringent provisions of POCSO Act. Learned counsel further pointed out that there are material contradictions in the date of engagement mentioned in both the statements. Moreover, the alleged “bad touch” was initially stated from 2022 onwards, however, in her supplementary statement, the allegations was related back to be October 2021 specific date. Learned Counsel submitted that t from glaring forensic gaps, as neither any electronic petitioner was seized nor examined. Moreover, t itself records that the “suspicious numbers” belonged to the -3- it. Later on, when he started messaging me on mobile, that time, my age was around the complainant in her application dated 17 years old in 2020, when she joined owever, in her supplementary statement dated was 16 years old in 2020. As birth certificate records of complainant show accepted, then her age would have been 13 years in December 2017, when the complainant allegedly 17 years as earlier implied. inconsistency is not trivial but of the prosecution case, as the complainant’s age is for invocation of the stringent provisions of pointed out that there are material contradictions in the date of engagement mentioned in both the the alleged “bad touch” was initially stated to from 2022 onwards, however, in her supplementary statement, the to be October 2021 but did not mention the Learned Counsel submitted that the investigation suffers either any electronic device of the Moreover, the 32-page CDR analysis itself records that the “suspicious numbers” belonged to the MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 complainant’s relatives, nearby acquaintances, and press reporters there is no material 6. was conducted only on 05.04.2025 years after the alleged commencement of incidents in October 2021. The report contains no findings which gravely 7. that the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) have been wrongly invoked, as the essential ingredients of the s submitted that, to attract the provisions of Section 6 of the POCSO Act, there must be an allegation of “ absent in the present case. It was further contended that Sectio POCSO Act is attracted in cases of “ however, the mere allegation of a forcible hug and obscene touching would not, per se learned Counsel submitted that Sect punishment for “ attracted as no such allegation is made in the FIR contended that the multiple repor clearly demonstrate 72030-2025 (O&M) complainant’s relatives, nearby acquaintances, and press reporters here is no material, linking the alleged threatening calls to the petitioner. Learned Counsel submitted that the was conducted only on 05.04.2025 i.e., approximately after the alleged commencement of incidents in October 2021. The report contains no findings regarding any gravely weakens the prosecution case Learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) have been wrongly invoked, as the essential ingredients of the said provisions are not made out. Learned Counsel submitted that, to attract the provisions of Section 6 of the POCSO Act, there must be an allegation of “penetrative sexual assault absent in the present case. It was further contended that Sectio POCSO Act is attracted in cases of “aggravated sexual assault however, the mere allegation of a forcible hug and obscene touching per se, attract the said provision against the petitioner. Lastly, earned Counsel submitted that Section 10 of the said Act pertains to punishment for “aggravated sexual assault attracted as no such allegation is made in the FIR contended that these charges have been progressively added through multiple reports dated 20.03.2025, 03.04.2025, and 04.04.2025, which demonstrate a “fishing for charges” against the petitioner. -4- complainant’s relatives, nearby acquaintances, and press reporters and alleged threatening calls to the petitioner. submitted that the medical examination approximately three and half after the alleged commencement of incidents in October 2021. The regarding any prolonged sexual assault, weakens the prosecution case. Learned Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the provisions of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act) have been wrongly invoked, as the essential aid provisions are not made out. Learned Counsel submitted that, to attract the provisions of Section 6 of the POCSO Act, penetrative sexual assault,” which is absent in the present case. It was further contended that Section 9 of the aggravated sexual assault”; however, the mere allegation of a forcible hug and obscene touching , attract the said provision against the petitioner. Lastly, ion 10 of the said Act pertains to aggravated sexual assault”, which, in any event, is not attracted as no such allegation is made in the FIR. Learned Counsel charges have been progressively added through ts dated 20.03.2025, 03.04.2025, and 04.04.2025, which a “fishing for charges” against the petitioner. MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 8. proceedings and any conviction thereof would amount to double prosecution as the petitioner in Central Jail under Sections 376, 420, 354, 294, 3 67 IT Act registered at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar (Mohali), wherein continuity of present FIR prosecution. 9. above has relied upon the judgment passed in the case of vs. State of U and Etc. vs. S Ors., vs. Ch. Pardeep Kumar Kesarwani v Appeal No. 3831 of 2025] has the power to quash criminal pr of process unreliable or insufficient material. 10. submits that in view of material lapses in investigation evidence, and absence of independent witnesses and omnibus allegations levelled by the complainant which are not supported by any truth, the FIR is a 72030-2025 (O&M) Learned Counsel has emphasized that proceedings and any conviction thereof would amount to double prosecution as the petitioner has already been in Central Jail, Mansa for conviction in an FIR No. 128 under Sections 376, 420, 354, 294, 323, 506, 147, 149 IPC and Section 67 IT Act registered at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar , wherein similar allegations had been levelled continuity of present FIR and proceedings thereof would result n. Learned counsel, to substantiate his arguments as detailed relied upon the judgment passed in the case of . State of U.P. and Ors.,(2004) 5 AWC 4318 . State of Punjab, (1980) SCC (2) Ch. Bhajan Laland Ors., AIR ardeep Kumar Kesarwani vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Appeal No. 3831 of 2025] wherein, it has been held that has the power to quash criminal proceedings where of law or where the proceedings are unreliable or insufficient material. While summarising, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of material lapses in investigation evidence, and absence of independent witnesses and omnibus allegations levelled by the complainant which are not by any truth, the FIR is a blatant -5- emphasized that the present proceedings and any conviction thereof would amount to double been serving life imprisonment FIR No. 128 dated 20.04.2018 23, 506, 147, 149 IPC and Section 67 IT Act registered at Police Station Zirakpur, District SAS Nagar had been levelled, therefore the and proceedings thereof would result in double , to substantiate his arguments as detailed relied upon the judgment passed in the case of R.P. Sharma . and Ors.,(2004) 5 AWC 4318; Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia (2) 565; State of Haryana and AIR 1992 Supreme Court 604, . State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. [Criminal wherein, it has been held that the High Court oceedings where it amounts to abuse where the proceedings are based on inherently , learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in view of material lapses in investigation, lack of cogent evidence, and absence of independent witnesses coupled with the vague and omnibus allegations levelled by the complainant which are not blatant abuse of law and the MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 pendency of the same is detrimental to the rights of the petitioner and hence the present 11. petition, submitting that the complainant was a minor at the time of th alleged occurrence and has levelled serious allegations of sexual harassment against the petitioner. It is further submitted that complainant under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and apparently, fiduciary relationship being in dominant position on account of his holding the religious supremacy qua the complainant 12. is a habitual offender and, apart from the present FIR, FIRs against him sentenced to life imprisonment argument of double jeopardy raised by the petitioner is stated to be misconceived, as the earlier FIR was lodged by a different complainant and pertains to a distinct and separate offence. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner cannot claim immunity in ground. 13. submits that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts which are to be adjudicated during trial and the cannot be exerci 72030-2025 (O&M) pendency of the same is detrimental to the rights of the petitioner and present petition deserves to be allowed. Per Contra, learned State counsel vehemently opposes the petition, submitting that the complainant was a minor at the time of th alleged occurrence and has levelled serious allegations of sexual harassment against the petitioner. It is further submitted that complainant has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. and there is consiste the petitioner has abused his position of authority fiduciary relationship being in dominant position on account of his holding the religious supremacy qua the complainant Further, learned State counsel is a habitual offender and, apart from the present FIR, FIRs against him, more so, the petitioner has already been convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment in one of the ent of double jeopardy raised by the petitioner is stated to be misconceived, as the earlier FIR was lodged by a different complainant and pertains to a distinct and separate offence. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner cannot claim immunity in Learned State Counsel while concluding his arguments submits that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts which are to be adjudicated during trial and the inherent powers of this Court cannot be exercised to circumvent the due process of law. -6- pendency of the same is detrimental to the rights of the petitioner and petition deserves to be allowed. ounsel vehemently opposes the petition, submitting that the complainant was a minor at the time of the alleged occurrence and has levelled serious allegations of sexual harassment against the petitioner. It is further submitted that the has supported the prosecution case in her statement recorded there is consistency in the same and abused his position of authority and the fiduciary relationship being in dominant position on account of his holding the religious supremacy qua the complainant. contended that the petitioner is a habitual offender and, apart from the present FIR, there are four other has already been convicted and in one of the cases. It is submitted that the ent of double jeopardy raised by the petitioner is stated to be misconceived, as the earlier FIR was lodged by a different complainant and pertains to a distinct and separate offence. Therefore, it is contended that the petitioner cannot claim immunity in the present matter on that Learned State Counsel while concluding his arguments submits that the petitioner has raised disputed questions of facts which inherent powers of this Court sed to circumvent the due process of law. MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 14. the record. 15. reproduce the FIR which records the allegations against the petitioner and reads as under: 72030-2025 (O&M) Heard Learned Counsel for the parties Before proceeding in the matter, it would be imperative to reproduce the FIR which records the allegations against the petitioner and under: - “Subject: Respected Sir, the humble submission is as under: "I am a resident of House No. 35, Adarsh Nag Kapurthala. I wish to inform your good self about a person who calls himself Prophet Bajinder Singh, whose temporary address is Villa No. 139, Omaxe, New Chandigarh, Punjab. He conducts a Christian Satsang in village Tajpur, PS Jalandhar, which people also call Glory and Wisdom Church. My parents started going to his Church in October 2017. I also started going to his Church with my parents in December 2017. In 2020, I became a part of the Worship Team in Bajinder Singh's Church. The children who becom part of the Worship Team come easily into the pastor's attention. From that time onwards, he also started knowing me closely. At that time, I was 17 years old. He took my phone number and started talking to me on the phone in an indecent and inappropriate manner, and also started messaging me. Because of his talks and the content of his messages, I started feeling scared. I was also afraid to tell my parents. But he continued saying the phone. After this, from 2022 onwards he started into the cabin in the Church on Sundays. Whenever I used to be alone, he would come inside the cabin and forcibly hug me and touch me in an obscene manner. I would get very -7- Heard Learned Counsel for the parties at length and perused Before proceeding in the matter, it would be imperative to reproduce the FIR which records the allegations against the petitioner and “Subject: Respected Sir, the humble submission is as under: "I am a resident of House No. 35, Adarsh Nagar, Kapurthala. I wish to inform your good self about a person who calls himself Prophet Bajinder Singh, whose temporary address is Villa No. 139, Omaxe, New Chandigarh, Punjab. He conducts a Christian Satsang in village Tajpur, PS- also call Glory and Wisdom My parents started going to his Church in October 2017. I also started going to his Church with my parents in December 2017. In 2020, I became a part of the Worship Team in Bajinder Singh's Church. The children who become part of the Worship Team come easily into the pastor's attention. From that time onwards, he also started knowing me closely. At that time, I was 17 years old. He took my phone number and started talking to me on the phone in an e manner, and also started messaging me. Because of his talks and the content of his messages, I started feeling scared. I was also afraid to tell my parents. But he continued saying many wrong things on After this, from 2022 onwards he started calling me alone into the cabin in the Church on Sundays. Whenever I used to be alone, he would come inside the cabin and forcibly hug me and touch me in an obscene manner. I would get very MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 72030-2025 (O&M) scared and somehow save myself. He used to tell me to marry him, even though he was already a married man. When I used to go to college, he used to follow me in his car. He used to threaten me that if I did not marry him, or if I told my parents anything about him, then he would get me, my parents, and my brother killed. Because of all this, I fell into depression. I started getting panic attacks. My parents started my treatment at NHS, but even after that I did not improve. Then they took me to Sigma Hospital, and later to ANR Hospital where the reason for my panic attacks was diagnosed. My therapy and tests were conducted there. During unconsciousness, I would only say that my mother and father should be saved. Respected Sir, since 2021, I have been living a very painful life. On 18th May 2023, my parents got me engaged Pastor Raja Singh. Even then, Baljinder Singh gave me many threats. He threatened my husband as well, saying that if I got married, he would get me killed. Despite all this fear, we somehow went ahead and got married. But even after the marriage, he did not stop following me. He kept trying to defame me and continued to threaten to kill my parents, my husband and my brother. He kept calling me from different mobile numbers to talk. I stayed at my in—laws' house for two months. While staying there, I became pregnant, and again I started getting panic attacks. When my husband took me to the doctor in Madhya Pradesh, the doctor asked me where my earlier treatment was going on. I told him it was from Jalandhar, Punjab. The doctor told me to continue my treat had only one fear — that he might get my family killed. As soon as he came to know that I had come to my parental home, heagain started troubling me and my husband. Respected Sir, during my treatment I had already told everything to my parents, my husband, and my brother. My -8- scared and somehow save myself. He used to tell me to ven though he was already a married man. When I used to go to college, he used to follow me in his car. He used to threaten me that if I did not marry him, or if I told my parents anything about him, then he would get me, my parents, and my brother killed. Because of all this, I fell into depression. I started getting panic attacks. My parents started my treatment at NHS, but even after that I did not improve. Then they took me to Sigma Hospital, and later to ANR Hospital where the reason cks was diagnosed. My therapy and tests were conducted there. During unconsciousness, I would only say that my mother and father should be saved. Respected Sir, since 2021, I have been living a very painful life. On 18th May 2023, my parents got me engaged to Pastor Raja Singh. Even then, Baljinder Singh gave me many threats. He threatened my husband as well, saying that if I got married, he would get me killed. Despite all this fear, we somehow went ahead and got married. But even d not stop following me. He kept trying to defame me and continued to threaten to kill my nd my brother. He kept calling me from different mobile numbers to talk. I laws' house for two months. While staying ame pregnant, and again I started getting panic attacks. When my husband took me to the doctor in Madhya Pradesh, the doctor asked me where my earlier treatment was going on. I told him it was from Jalandhar, Punjab. The doctor told me to continue my treatment from there only. I that he might get my family killed. As soon as he came to know that I had come to my parental home, heagain started troubling me and my husband. Respected Sir, during my treatment I had already told my parents, my husband, and my brother. My MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 72030-2025 (O&M) parents were extremely worried after hearing everything and, out of fear of social defamation, they became very frightened. But my husband gave me a lot of courage. On the way also, many times Bajinder's people t me and my husband and made fun of me. Re when things went beyond all limits, my parents and my husband decided to file a police report. But even then, we remained scared because he used to say that police cannot do anything to him; because the police he came to know that we were planning to file a police complaint, Bajinder Singh made the President of his Church call my mother, saying: "Sister, let us sit together and settle this matter peacefully, do not file a poli time my mother scolded him a lot and said, '"You als daughters." Then he said, "I am coming to tomorrow. We can give you the recording of this conversation." On 16 February 2025 around12/12.30 house. First, he spoke very lovingly. After that, Avtar Singh and Harjinder Singh started giving direct threats and began saying everything in favour of Bajinder Singh. They said: "You people should forgive Prophet Bajinder Singh, he is a religious leader. If you do not forgive him, we will defame your daughter a lot, and because of this your daughter will not be able to live at her in— Singh will get your daughter killed. Bajinder is not afraid of the police because the police listen lot of money. The law is in his pocket". Respected Sir, till today, threats. have not only' been given by Avtar Singh and Bajinder Singh, but also by his associates, namely: Akbar, Meenu, Patrus, Ranjeet, Rimpy, Vinya. Respected S that Bajinder Singh and all of them should receive the strictest punishment under the law. If he is not punished, then he will have me, my husband, my parents, my brother, -9- parents were extremely worried after hearing everything and, out of fear of social defamation, they became very frightened. But my husband gave me a lot of courage. On the way also, many times Bajinder's people threatened me and my husband and made fun of me. Respected Sir, when things went beyond all limits, my parents and my husband decided to file a police report. But even then, we remained scared because he used to say that police cannot cause the police are with him. When he came to know that we were planning to file a police aint, Bajinder Singh made the President of his Church call my mother, saying: "Sister, let us sit together and settle this matter peacefully, do not file a police complaint. At that time my mother scolded him a lot and said, '"You also have daughters." Then he said, "I am coming to your house tomorrow. We can give you the recording of this 12/12.30 PM, they came to our he spoke very lovingly. After that, Avtar Singh and Harjinder Singh started giving direct threats and began saying everything in favour of Bajinder Singh. They said: "You people should forgive Prophet Bajinder Singh, he is a f you do not forgive him, we will defame your daughter a lot, and because of this your daughter will —laws' house. And Bajinder Singh will get your daughter killed. Bajinder is not afraid of the police because the police listen to him, because he has a in his pocket". Respected Sir, till today, threats. have not only' been given by Avtar Singh and Bajinder Singh, but also by his associates, namely: Akbar, Patrus, Ranjeet, Rimpy, Vinya. Respected Sir, I want that Bajinder Singh and all of them should receive the strictest punishment under the law. If he is not punished, then he will have me, my husband, my parents, my brother, MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 16. allegations levelled in the FIR and reiterated in the under Section 164 Cr.P.C. harassment, alleged acts of inappropriate physical contact, repeated intimidation, stalking, and threats. The the petitioner of abusing hi with regard to delay in lodging of the FIR is concerned by itself, be a ground for quashing involving allegations of sexual offences, where delay may occur due fear, social stigma, psychological trauma, or intimidation. the Court is only required to examine whether the allegations constitute the offences alleged, and not whether the prosecution will ultimately be able to succeed in doubt ensuing a conviction 17. pointed towards the sequence of events, be adjudicated by leading proper petitioner will always have the opportunity 72030-2025 (O&M) and my very small baby—who is only 15 days old am also in great physical pain because I have undergone an operation, due to which I cannot move around much. For this reason, 'I am extremely scared, and he will have us killed. If any harm is caused to me, my parents, my husband, my brother, or to my life or property, B Singh, and all the persons whose names have been mentioned will be responsible, I shall be grateful to you.” From the perusal of the FIR and the record allegations levelled in the FIR and reiterated in the under Section 164 Cr.P.C., disclose specific instances of sexual harassment, alleged acts of inappropriate physical contact, repeated intimidation, stalking, and threats. There are serious a the petitioner of abusing his position of Authority with regard to delay in lodging of the FIR is concerned be a ground for quashing of the FIR involving allegations of sexual offences, where delay may occur due fear, social stigma, psychological trauma, or intimidation. the Court is only required to examine whether the allegations constitute the offences alleged, and not whether the prosecution will be able to succeed in proving the same beyond reasonable ensuing a conviction. Further, although the learned counsel for the pointed towards the contradictions with respect to age, dates, and sequence of events, however, the same is a be adjudicated by leading proper and cogent petitioner will always have the opportunity -10- who is only 15 days old—killed. I physical pain because I have undergone an operation, due to which I cannot move around much. For this reason, 'I am extremely scared, and he will have us killed. If any harm is caused to me, my parents, my husband, my brother, or to my life or property, Bajinder Singh, Avtar Singh, and all the persons whose names have been mentioned will be responsible, I shall be grateful to you.” FIR and the record, apparently, the allegations levelled in the FIR and reiterated in the statement recorded disclose specific instances of sexual harassment, alleged acts of inappropriate physical contact, repeated re are serious allegations against s position of Authority. So far as the issue with regard to delay in lodging of the FIR is concerned, the same cannot, of the FIR particularly in cases involving allegations of sexual offences, where delay may occur due to fear, social stigma, psychological trauma, or intimidation. At this stage, the Court is only required to examine whether the allegations prima facie constitute the offences alleged, and not whether the prosecution will proving the same beyond reasonable learned counsel for the petitioner contradictions with respect to age, dates, and a matter of trial, which would and cogent evidence. Moreso, the petitioner will always have the opportunity to lead his defence. Minor MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 inconsistencies or variations in statements are not uncommon and do not, ipso facto, render the pros quashing. The determination of the exact age of the complainant and attraction of evidence and cannot be conclusively adjudicated in proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C inherent powers. 18. “State of Haryana vs. Ch “Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Etc. vs. State of Punjab”, correct to the extent that the High Court in exercising its extraordinary powers under Article 226 under section 482 of Cr.P.C. can quash the FIR but the facts of the present case do not fall such powers. The arguments of the petitioner that the contents of FIR are so absurd and inherently improbable are specific in nature and the complete narrated. The same needs to be looked into by the trial Court on the basis of evidence which shall be led by the prosecution as well as after considering the defence. Singh Sibbia and Etc. petitioner primarily concerned with the scope of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C process of law. But the 72030-2025 (O&M) inconsistencies or variations in statements are not uncommon and do not, , render the prosecution case improbable so as to warrant quashing. The determination of the exact age of the complainant and attraction of provisions of POCSO Act are factual issues which require evidence and cannot be conclusively adjudicated in gs under Section 482 Cr.P.C so as to attract the exercise of inherent powers. The judgmental laws relied upon by the petitioner “State of Haryana vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Etc. vs. State of Punjab”, correct to the extent that the High Court in exercising its extraordinary powers under Article 226 of Constitution of India under section 482 of Cr.P.C. can quash the FIR but the facts of the present case do not fall within the parameters laid down for exercise of such powers. The arguments of the petitioner that the contents of FIR are so absurd and inherently improbable and is not tenable. The allegations are specific in nature and the complete series narrated. The same needs to be looked into by the trial Court on the basis of evidence which shall be led by the prosecution as well as after considering the defence. However, the second judgement in case of Singh Sibbia and Etc. vs. State of Punjab”,(supra) primarily concerned with the scope of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C and powers of the Court to curtail the abuse of process of law. But the present petition concerns the quashing of -11- inconsistencies or variations in statements are not uncommon and do not, ecution case improbable so as to warrant the quashing. The determination of the exact age of the complainant and POCSO Act are factual issues which require evidence and cannot be conclusively adjudicated in the summary so as to attract the exercise of relied upon by the petitioner in case of Bhajan Lal and Ors.” (supra) and Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Etc. vs. State of Punjab”,(supra) are correct to the extent that the High Court in exercising its extraordinary of Constitution of India or the inherent powers under section 482 of Cr.P.C. can quash the FIR but the facts of the within the parameters laid down for exercise of such powers. The arguments of the petitioner that the contents of FIR are is not tenable. The allegations series of incidents have been duly narrated. The same needs to be looked into by the trial Court on the basis of evidence which shall be led by the prosecution as well as after econd judgement in case of “Gurbaksh vs. State of Punjab”,(supra) relied upon by the primarily concerned with the scope of anticipatory bail under and powers of the Court to curtail the abuse of present petition concerns the quashing of the FIR MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the same is not directly applicable in Kesarwani vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.,” (supra) in the present case guiding test for quashing of the criminal proceedings as laid down in the said judgments (a) Firstly, the petitioner has raised arguments only qua the inconsistencies in the statement investigation due appreciation of cogent evidences. specific allegations against the petitioner in Therefore, the petitioner fails to show any material of sterling and impeccable quality warranting quashing of the FIR. (b) Secondly, t which c in the FIR petitioner does not dismiss or condemned the accusations levelled against him. (c) Thirdly, there is no such by the petitioner which could refute the prosecution case shows that the FIR is fabricated. (d) Lastly, as there are disputed questions of facts which could be adjudicated only by leading cogent evidences by the prosecution not result in trial would ultimately serve the ends of justice. 72030-2025 (O&M) under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the same is not directly in the present case. Further, the judgment in the case of “ Kesarwani vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.,” (supra) in the present case for the reasons that it does not satisfies guiding test for quashing of the criminal proceedings as laid down in the said judgments due to following reasons: - Firstly, the petitioner has raised arguments only qua the inconsistencies in the statements, delay and the lapse in the investigation which is a matter of trial to be adjudicated after due appreciation of cogent evidences. specific allegations against the petitioner in the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the petitioner fails to show any material of sterling and impeccable quality warranting quashing of the FIR. Secondly, the petitioner has failed to brought any evidence which could reject or overrule the factual assertions contained in the FIR as the mere minor inconsistencies pointed out by the petitioner does not per se persuade a reasonable person to dismiss or condemned the accusations levelled against him. Thirdly, there is no such unimpeachable by the petitioner which could refute the prosecution case shows that the FIR is fabricated. Lastly, as there are disputed questions of facts which could be adjudicated only by leading cogent evidences by the prosecution as well as by the defence not result in the abuse of process of law and the continuation of trial would ultimately serve the ends of justice. -12- under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the same is not directly Further, the judgment in the case of “Pardeep Kumar Kesarwani vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.,” (supra) is not applicable the reasons that it does not satisfies the four guiding test for quashing of the criminal proceedings as laid down in the Firstly, the petitioner has raised arguments only qua the s, delay and the lapse in the which is a matter of trial to be adjudicated after due appreciation of cogent evidences. Prima facie, there are specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR as well as the statement recorded under Section 164 of Cr.P.C. Therefore, the petitioner fails to show any material of sterling and impeccable quality warranting quashing of the FIR. he petitioner has failed to brought any evidence, the factual assertions contained inconsistencies pointed out by the persuade a reasonable person to dismiss or condemned the accusations levelled against him. peachable material relied upon by the petitioner which could refute the prosecution case or Lastly, as there are disputed questions of facts which could be adjudicated only by leading cogent evidences by the defence, therefore, the trial would the abuse of process of law and the continuation of trial would ultimately serve the ends of justice. MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 19. independent witnesses, alleged forensic gaps, non devices, or insufficiency of medical evidence pertain to the quality and adequacy of investigation the domain of at this stage. misconceived pertains to a different FIR lodged by a different complainant concernin a separate cause of action. distinct allegations and, therefore, cannot amount to a second prosecution for the same offence. 20. power under Section circumspection, and only in cases where the allegations made in the FIR, even if taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, do not disclose the commission of any offence or where the proceedings are attended with jurisdiction, cannot veracity, reliability, or sufficiency of the material collected during investigation. 21. Court further finds that the order framing charges does not suffer from any patent illegality or perversity. At the stage of framing of charge, the Court is only required to see whether there is a whether the material on record raises a strong suspicion against the 72030-2025 (O&M) So far as the arguments with regard independent witnesses, alleged forensic gaps, non devices, or insufficiency of medical evidence pertain to the quality and adequacy of investigation is concerned, then th the domain of learned Trial Court and cannot be evaluated conclusively at this stage. Nonetheless, the plea of double jeopardy is also misconceived, for the reason that the earlier conviction of the petitioner pertains to a different FIR lodged by a different complainant concernin a separate cause of action. However, the present prosecution arises out of distinct allegations and, therefore, cannot amount to a second prosecution for the same offence. Moreover, it is well settled power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection, and only in cases where the allegations made in the FIR, even if taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, do not disclose the commission of any offence or where the proceedings are attended with mala fide intent. This Court, while exercising such jurisdiction, cannot run a mini trial to apprecia veracity, reliability, or sufficiency of the material collected during investigation. In view of the facts and material on record of this case, the Court further finds that the order framing charges does not suffer from any patent illegality or perversity. At the stage of framing of charge, the Court is only required to see whether there is a whether the material on record raises a strong suspicion against the -13- with regard to the absence of independent witnesses, alleged forensic gaps, non-seizure of electronic devices, or insufficiency of medical evidence pertain to the quality and is concerned, then the said aspects fall within and cannot be evaluated conclusively he plea of double jeopardy is also he earlier conviction of the petitioner pertains to a different FIR lodged by a different complainant concerning he present prosecution arises out of distinct allegations and, therefore, cannot amount to a second prosecution preposition of law that, the 482 Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection, and only in cases where the allegations made in the FIR, even if taken at their face value and accepted in entirety, do not disclose the commission of any offence or where the proceedings are manifestly intent. This Court, while exercising such appreciate the evidences to test the veracity, reliability, or sufficiency of the material collected during the facts and material on record of this case, the Court further finds that the order framing charges does not suffer from any patent illegality or perversity. At the stage of framing of charge, the Court is only required to see whether there is a prima facie case and whether the material on record raises a strong suspicion against the MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRM-M-72030 accused. A detailed evaluation of the evidence is impermissible at stage. 22. can only be adjudicated up interference prosecution Although, the High Court has inherent powers to do so but the fact gravity of offence in the present case do not carve out any justification for exercising the extraordinary powers 2023. 23. petition. The same is accordingly with the matter uninfluenced by any observations made herein, which are confined solely to the adjudication of the present petition. 24. March 07, 2026 Deepak Patwal Whether speaking/reasoned: Whether Reportable: 72030-2025 (O&M) accused. A detailed evaluation of the evidence is impermissible at The present petition raises disputed questions of fact which can only be adjudicated upon, after evidence is led by the parties interference, at this stage, would amount to stifling a legitimate and transgression into the powers of the Although, the High Court has inherent powers to do so but the fact gravity of offence in the present case do not carve out any justification for exercising the extraordinary powers under In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. The trial Court shall proceed with the matter uninfluenced by any observations made herein, which are confined solely to the adjudication of the present petition. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. , 2026 Whether speaking/reasoned:- Yes/No Whether Reportable:- Yes/No -14- accused. A detailed evaluation of the evidence is impermissible at this disputed questions of fact which after evidence is led by the parties and any would amount to stifling a legitimate and transgression into the powers of the learned trial Court. Although, the High Court has inherent powers to do so but the facts and gravity of offence in the present case do not carve out any justification under Section 528 of BNSS, In view of the above, this Court finds no merit in the present dismissed. The trial Court shall proceed with the matter uninfluenced by any observations made herein, which are confined solely to the adjudication of the present petition. Pending application(s), if any, stands disposed of. (ALOK JAIN) JUDGE MANJU 2026.03.09 15:46 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document